A BAD CASE OF PMS

Posted On: 2010-01-24 22:59:06

A BAD CASE OF PMS

I want to apologize for Friday’s last blog. To be honest, I had horrible PMS, protect-marriage syndrome. Protect Marriage Syndrome, or PMS, comes on when you have to sit for hours on end and listen to Yale and Cambridge educated experts testify that you are not insane, a child-molester, a degenerate, or an obsessive compulsive gender confused threat to civilization which I guess is supposed to make you feel good.

Only, then it is followed up with having to listen to another lawyer attempt to deconstruct that witness’s testimony to the most absurd, out of context, details, for hours and hours and hours with the purpose of denying your basic dignity, worth as a human being and your constitutional rights.

I had one hell of a case of bad PMS on Friday.

GAYS ON PARADE (STRIKE THAT) TRIAL!

In her testimony on January 15th, Helen Zia talked about being on trial at her work for being gay and how that depleted her, even caused her to burn her journal, which is like losing a limb to a writer.

All LGBT people are on trial under Prop 8. Even though marriage equality supporters have brought forward this constitutional challenge to denying our right to marry, like Zia, we are on trial. We are on trial as parents, as citizens, as worthy human beings. There is nothing right about this.

LGBT people are equal. We are as whole, perfect, and complete as our straight brothers and sisters. We too have hearts that beat and love. When we fall in love it is our hearts first that seek connection with our beloveds. It’s not about plumbing. Dr. Sylvia Rhue with the National Black Justice Coalition says, “When the hearts fit the parts fit.”

The attorney asked Helen Zia, “How do you feal about Lia?”

Zia replied, “ She’s my soul mate. I love her, she’s the person I want to spend the rest of my life, the most important person to me in the world.”

Most husbands and wives, be they straight or gay, know exactly what Zia is talking about. That’s why we choose to marry, because we want to do everything we can to protect, honor, and cherish our beloved.

Zia spoke of her and Lia, getting their domestic partnership licenses. “They issues dog licenses at the same counter,” she said and then discussed getting married in San Francisco in 2004 when it was legal for a little over a month. She spoke of the wedding reception she and Lia had planned with their families that would be attended by her mother, siblings, and some of her sibling’s children.

“My marriage was invalidated a week before our wedding reception.” The attorney asks her, “How did that make you feel?”

Anyone with a heart can guess how it made her feel.

Zia said she felt “devastated, sad, grieved, horrible, our marriage had made us so happy, brought us so much joy, and was suddenly invalidated.” But what struck an even deeper chord for Zia was that she and Lia felt that their relationship was invalidated “and as human beings we were invalidated.”

PARTNERS IN LIFE? DO YOU MEAN LIFE INSURANCE?

Zia, and many of the other 4,000 couples like my wife, Molly and I, who were married in 2004 and later judicially invalidated, struggled to get through that dark time until we were able to marry again in 2008.

“Getting married has presented numerous tangible and intangible benefits.” Zia said, “After marriage, my niece came up and said to Lia. “Auntie Lia, now you are really my auntie.”

Marriage has also made a difference to how they relate to people. “People wondered ‘who is this person who is hanging on to you extra close?’

‘This is my partner.’

‘Partner, partner in what business?’

We’d say, ‘we are partners in life.’ And get used to seeing this look on their face, ‘What does life mean?‘Do you mean life insurance?’”

Marriage also made a difference Lia’s parents and family. “It’s a matter of how our families relate to people,” Zia said. “We show up to every family event and they ask ‘who is that?’ ‘This is Helen’s friend.’ They never got partner, now with marriage, they are able to say ‘Helen is my daughter-in-law.’

For Helen’s mother too, marriage has given her a language to explain her relationship to Lia. “My mother would struggle to say this is Helen’s friend and now she would say ‘this is my daughter-in-law.’ That’s it. end of story. We are not partners in life or business. We are spouses. This is my wife.”

MARRIAGE IS THE JOINING OF TWO FAMILIES

“Marriage is not just about us.” Zia testified. “Our families related to each other differently. Marriage is the joining of two families. My family and Lia’s family relate to each other differently. My brother lived near my father-in-law for years. After we were married, Lia’s father stopped by my brother’s house and dropped things off. When he introduced his children he said ‘These are my daughters and this is my favorite daughter-in-law.’”

Zia spoke of how both she and her wife Lia, shared “the important events in life,” together, births and deaths of family members. “When Lia’s father died, that’s when family comes together.” She spoke of how having marriage secured her place in the family. She was a part of the memorial and listed in the obituary. “Marriage defines who family is, who is in the circle.”

While Zia spoke, the feeling tone in the overflow room was one of soft, gentleness. It was like being in a movie theatre where people are watching a romantic comedy. There were aahhs, warm laughter, and even a few tears as Zia recounted her relationship with Lia, what Lia means to her, and how having legal marriage has affected their life.

It was deeply touching. As the court house closed up that day, one woman spoke with me and said, “I never wanted to get married until I heard Helen Zia speak. I want to know what it’s like to feel what she described.”

In the words of John Lennon, “You may say I’m a dreamer, I’m not the only one. I hope someday you will join us and the world will live as one.”

Look for my new book Love Warriors: The Rise of the Marriage Equality Movement and Why It Will Prevail, April 2010.

For updates of the Prop 8 trial for January 24 and 25th, go to: Courage Campaign’s Prop 8 Trial Tracker. I'm hitting the proverbial showers.

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

BEING GAY IS BAD FOR MY HEALTH, BUT NOT FOR THE REASONS YOU THINK

Posted On: 2010-01-22 15:37:37

BEING GAY IS BAD FOR MY HEALTH, BUT NOT FOR THE REASONS YOU THINK

1-22-10

I have not been to the gym since the Prop 8 trial started two weeks ago. I can’t even think of going to the gym in the morning when I have to race to San Francisco, go through the security obstacle course at the Federal building which includes taking off my shoes, jacket, turning my lap top on, going through a metal detector, surrendering my camera, bending over and coughing, okay it’s not that bad, but close.

Then I take the elevator to the 19th floor, slam my coffee, compliments of Billy the Rockstar, turn on my computer, connect to the network, bring up Twitter, Facebook, AOL, my website, and word and stake out my territory.

At lunch, I stuff my face with carbs, since the salad bar line is way too long, and then extra carbs to numb out the pain of the tortuous cross-examination. Girlfriend, I’m putting on the pounds!

TODAY STINKS-LITERALLY!

Being in the court room today feels like sitting in a college statistics class. It’s just hella boring, maybe because it’s my 40th birthday today and I came to the courtroom instead of getting a massage and doing something even mildly more fun than this today, like getting a root canal for example.

Maybe it’s because there is something way too human transpiring in this room today. The overflow room is filled with people and for whatever reason there are terrible odors!! Who the hell keeps farting? What’s with the severe body odor and the hacking coughs?

We gay people need some self-care. If you are sick, get into bed and drink plenty of liquids. Bathe-it does a body good. Wash your clothes. Leave the room if you need to pass gas.

Oh shoot, now I’m sneezing.

This may be my last blog for the day, especially since Yeson8 counsel is now talking about a lesbian who was married to a man and must have enjoyed having sex with him. I don’t think I can take listening to argument the Yeson8 counsel is trying to make.

Just because gay people may have had str8 sex, that doesn’t mean they are str8. It means that we were straight-curious or hadn’t come out yet.

The case will continue Monday and Tuesday and Judge Walker indicated today that the closing arguments will likely be scheduled in February. Marriage Equality USA plans to hold a vigil on the last day of closing arguments. There will also be a rally day of decision which will likely be within 90 days of closing arguments.

In the meantime, send thoughts of equality to Hawaii, Indiana, and New Hampshire where opponents of equality are trying to move us backwards.

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

ALL MAJOR PSYCHOLOGICAL AND PSYCHIATRIC ASSOCIATIONS STATE CONVERSION THERAPY IS INEFFECTIVE AND HARMS GAY PEOPLE

Posted On: 2010-01-22 11:24:07

ALL MAJOR PSYCHOLOGICAL AND PSYCHIATRIC ASSOCIATIONS STATE CONVERSION THERAPY IS INEFFECTIVE AND HARMS GAY PEOPLE

Prop 8 Trial ---1/22/10

I started the morning with gulping down my latte. While I was doing this and admiring the historic photos of San Francisco on the 19th floor in the federal building, I struck up a conversation with the other person in the hallway. It turned out that I was talking to Brian Woodward from the California Family Council. We talked about how we could find our commonalities and exchanged business cards.

I then tossed my cup in the trash and found that the trial was already in full swing with psychologist Dr. Gregory Herek from the University of Davis. As a psychologist myself, I’ve been following Dr. Herek’s work for decades and even had the opportunity back in 2005 to be on a panel for marriage equality with him.

Dr. Herek has an impressive record of publications on sexual orientation and hate crimes.

Dr. Herek discusses the American Psychiatric Association’s removal of homosexuality from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) in 1973.

Dr. Evelyn Hooker, a psychologist who published "The Adjustment of the Male Overt Homosexual" about her research on psychological testing of gay men and heterosexual men, helped create a body of psychological research that led to homosexuality being removed from the DSM.

Hooker assessed both gay and straight men and then had experts review the tests and select who was gay, was one of the people . The experiment, which was repeated by other researchers demonstrated that most gay men demonstrated the same level of social adjustment as heterosexual men in the general population.

Dr. Herek spoke about how most gay, lesbian, bisexual people do not believe that their sexual orientation is a choice. He referenced a study completed in Sacramento, California with 2,200 participants. Subjects were asked if they felt being LGB was a choice.

-87% gay men said they believed it was not a choice

-70% lesbians said they believed it was not a choice

-59% bi men said they believed it was not a choice

-45% bi women said they believed it was not a choice

Herek was asked if he believed if reparative therapy was effective. Reparative therapy, sometimes called conversion therapy, is intended to change a gay person’s sexual orientation to heterosexual.

Herek said “When we use the word effective with therapeutic intervention it means it consistently works, produces the outcome that we expect without causing harm to the individual…No, it is not effective.”

Herek notes that a taskforce was created to evaluate the effectiveness of these therapies. According to Herek, “the taskforce provided a report on their effectiveness and safety of reparative therapy. In their review of the literature, they found that there were not many high quality studies that had been done to speak to the effectiveness of these studies.”

Studies were then conducted and the APA Taskforce concluded that reparative therapy does not reduce same-sex attraction, has a limited effectiveness, and does some harm to individuals, including depression and anxiety.

Herek reported that the American Psychiatric Association, American Psychological Association, American Counselors Association, American Teachers Associatoin, and the American Pediatric Society do not support reparative therapies, believe they are ineffective, and they believe that this harms youth.

Herek mentions a survey of married same-sex couples in Massachusetts released in May 2009 by the Massachusetts Department of Public Health entitled the Health and Marriage Equality in Massachusetts Survey.

According to an executive summary of the survey published by the Williams Institute (May 2009), the survey found that same-sex married couples reported that marriage had a positive impact on their lives. Seventy-two per cent (72 %) of the married individuals reported “feeling more committed” to their spouse and “70% felt more accepted by their communities.”

Individuals also reported other important benefits from marriage, including “feeling that they have to worry less about legal problems (48%),” being able to give their same-sex spouse health insurance (30%), coming out to co-workers (82%), and healthcare providers (82%), and for those raising children, feeling that their children are “happier and better off as a result of their marriage (93%).” Especially notable was the finding that 62% of individuals reported that being married increased their family’s acceptance of their partner.

1 IN 5 LGBT PEOPLE EXPERIENCE VIOLENCE IN THEIR LIFETIME

Herek discusses the stigma against LGBT people. He says that many heterosexuals experience “negative feelings towards lesbians and gay men, they even feel disgusted” by gay people. Herek mentions the violence against LGBT people and how the FBI and State of California track hate crimes against LGB people.

According to Herek, 1 in 5 LGBT people experienced some sort of violence in the course of their lifetimes. Others, he reports have had some experience of discrimination in employment.

Herek speaks about how if two men walked down the street holding hands that would attract violence and harassment.

FYI-January 30 is international same-sex hand holding day.

LGBT YOUTH ARE BULLIED IN SCHOOL AND HARMED BY THE NOTION THAT THEIR SEXUAL ORIENTATION CAN BE CHANGED THROUGH THERAPY

Herek also mentions harassment and bullying against youth in schools.

While not discussed by Herek, I present you with findings from GLSEN’s 2007 National School Climate Survey which I found shocking.

• 91% of LGBT middle school students said they experienced harassment at school because of their sexual orientation.

• 59% reported physical harassment

• 39% reported physical assault, compared to 20% of high school students

• 82% heard names like “faggot” and “dyke”

• 63% heard staff make homophobic remarks

• 50% of LGBT middle school students surveyed reported missing at least one day of school in the past month because they felt unsafe.

• LGBT students who missed school because of safety had lower GPAs than other LGBT students (2.4 to 2.9)

• 57% of students who experience harassment never report it because they fear the teachers won’t help or it will only make things worse.

• School safety influences academic success.

• LGBT youth who feel unsafe, miss school more frequently, and have lower GPAs than youth who are not threatened, this leads LGBTIQ students to drop out.

• Approx. 28% of gay and lesbian youth drop out of high school because of discomfort (due to verbal and physical abuse) in the school environment. Remafedi, Gary. (1987). "Male Homosexuality: The Adolescent's Perspective." Pediatrics, Issue 79. pp. 326-337.

• Bullying and violence is even higher for gender non-conforming kids.

On a side note, the movie Prayers for Bobby is a great resource on illustrating the harm done to LGBT youth when they are pressured to change something they cannot change.

KINSEY’S CONTINUUM

During the cross-examination, Herek is asked about sexual orientation and how it is defined. He mentions Kinsey’s continuum of sexual orientation, which I’ve provided for you below. Herek says that as a culture we’ve shortened Kinsey’s continuum to 3 categories.

1. Heterosexual

2. Homosexual (gay/lesbian)

3. Bisexual

However, Kinsey’s continuum is more exact and people's behaviors, attractions, and identity are not always consistent. For example, someone’s sexual experience/behavior might be a 0-exclusively heterosexual, but their attraction is to members of the same-sex. Additionally, someone might have the experience of a 3, below, but identity as heterosexual.

• 0- Exclusively heterosexual experience

• 1- Predominately het exp. only incidental homosexual exp.

• 2- Predominately het exp. but more than incidental homosexual exp.

• 3- Equally het & homosexual experiences

• 4- Predominately homosexual exp. but more than incidental het exp.

• 5- Predominately homosexual exp. only incidental het exp.

• 6- Exclusively homosexual experience

And with that, it’s time for a break!

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

THE SKY IS FALLING, THE SKY IS FALLING

Posted On: 2010-01-19 15:53:34

THE SKY IS FALLING, THE SKY IS FALLING

Attorney for the Proponents of Prop 8, Cooper, is cross-examining Lee Badgett, Ph.D., a professor of economics at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst and the Research Director of the Williams’ Institute at UCLA.

Cooper asserts that research suggests that many straight couples in the Netherlands are choosing to register as partners and not marry, and he is blaming this on gay marriage. How the heck he can scapegoat gay people for this I do not know. It seems quite obvious to me that straight people in the Netherlands are choosing to be registered partners because it’s an option. Just like same-sex couples in the Netherlands are choosing to marry, like my friends Martha (American) and Lin McDevitt-Pugh (Australian), who met while both were living in Amsterdam and fell in love.

I CAN BRING MY DOG BACK TO THE COUNTRY BUT NOT MY WIFE

Despite the fact that Martha and Lin are legally married in the Netherlands, the United States will not recognize their marriage under the so-called Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Martha, can bring her dog back to the United States, but her wife and her step-children are not recognized as legal family because of the DOMA law. I am hopeful that this case, or the case filed on behalf of married Massachusetts couples filed by GLAD, will lead the United States Supreme Court to find DOMA unconstitutional or Congress will find a way to undue this shameful law that they passed in the first place in 1996 during a panic over gay marriage.

Before I go any further in sharing Cooper’s challenge to the research that the Williams’ Institute at UCLA has conducted insinuating that their numbers are exaggerated, I ask, why should a huge number of people have to be harmed by marriage discrimination before we step up and treat people with respect and dignity? Witnessing the harm marriage discrimination has on even one family is wrong. As Americans should we not speak out and work for equality for all people? As Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. taught, shouldn’t we assert the inherent worth and equality all people?

Badgett estimates that their were approximately 18,000 legal same-sex marriages.

Cooper asserts that Massachusetts couples do not have the option of domestic partnerships or civil unions, only marriage. His point, “presumably some people would choose to register as domestic partnerships, just as they do in California and in the Netherlands. Shouldn’t your 60% marriage rate be adjusted to account for the same-sex couples who would have opted for a domestic partnership?”

Badgett- I don’t think so. People voted with their feet, 25% of California same-sex couples got married in five months, and you double that for the whole year instead of just that six months,

Cooper-So I take it your answer is no. Cooper-There are some disincentives for CA same-sex couples to marry that same-sex couples in MA don’t have, correct?

Badgett-No

Cooper-I was just advised by one of my colleagues that I was wrong about whether a document had been submitted.

Cooper-After 205, Domestic partnerships became less popular as an option among same-sex couples. Would you agree with that?

Badgett-No, I don’t think passing AB 205 had anything to do with it.

He notes the number of dissolutions of same-sex couple relationships by year.

2002-- 296

2003--733

2004 --2,513

He is trying to make the point that people ended their Domestic partnerships because they were given rights.

My observation is that people who ended their domestic partnerships were in relationships that had already ended where partners had been slow or lazy about filing their dissolution papers, like many straight people do with their divorce papers. When these individuals realized that if they didn’t file a dissolution their ex-partner would have access to their community property and it would require them to go to court, not simply file a notarized piece of paper, they got online found the dissolution forms and got their butts to a notary.

Cooper is also suggesting that people terminated their domestic partnerships because they didn’t want to share community property rights and notes that Massachusetts is not a community property state.

I would argue that heterosexuals who get all of their rights at once, including the 1,138 federal rights that come with marriage, are able to do pre-nups, whereas same-sex couples had no opportunity to consider how this new status would affect their tax status as it became law on January 1, 2005.

Badgett echoes my belief in her testimony by stating that “many tax attorneys advised same-sex couples to dissolve their domestic partnerships” until they understood the impact of this new law. Badgett notes that domestic partnership was a unique status created in California and an unknown quantity.

I would also note that people chose not to become domestic partners because now Senator Mark Leno was simultaneously working to pass a marriage equality bill in the legislature. Also, many people who didn’t want to wait to get married, and were not inspired by domestic partnership went north to Canada to tie the knot. Those same California couples might have chosen to get married in Massachusetts did not because of the 1913 law preventing couples from marrying in states that had mini-DOMA laws like California’s Knight Initiative.

It’s been an hour now into the cross-examination and Cooper continues to belabor the point that he believes the calculations Badgett has come to in the Williams’ Institute Reports, are exaggerated.

As we make these estimates, things keep changing, now Vermont, Iowa, Connecticut and New Hampshire allow same-sex couples the right to marry and so our financial estimates for Massachusetts may change based on the couples who get married in those other states.

Cooper asks Badgett-Would you change your opinion if it cost the money government rather than save it?

Court takes a small break.

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

LEE BADGETT-THE COSTS OF MARRIAGE DISCRIMINATION 1-19-10 Blog #2

Posted On: 2010-01-19 12:48:10

THE COSTS OF MARRIAGE DISCRIMINATION 1-19-10 Blog #2

M.V. Lee Badgett, Ph.D., a professor of economics at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst and the Research Director of the Williams’ Institute at UCLA. She was called to testify about the private harms caused by Prop. 8 and the impact of same-sex marriage on the marriages of different-sex couples.

Badgett has a BA in economics from the University of Chicago (1982) and a PhD in economics from UC Berkeley (1990). Her book, “Money, Myths, and Change: The Economic Lives of Lesbians and Gay Men” (University of Chicago Press) presents her ground-breaking work on sexual orientation discrimination and family policy. Her new book “When Gay People Get Married,” asks whether same-sex marriage will change marriage or change GLB people, drawing on the U.S. and European experiences with same-sex marriage.

Photo https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/about/staff/Pages/default.aspx

Professor Badgett’s Opinions Fall into 4 Categories

1. Prop 8 has inflicted economic harm on same-sex couples residing in California and their children

2. Permitting same-sex couples to marry will not adversely affect heterosexual couples or marriage

3. Same-sex couples are similar to different sex couples in most economic and demographic characteristics

4. Prop 8 imposed substantial economic losses on California and its counties and municipalities.

THE INABILITY TO MARRY INFLICTS ECONOMIC HARMS ON SAME-SEX COUPLES IN MANY WAY

-Marriage confers numerous economic benefits many of which are not provided by DPS

-Greater specialization of labor

-Reduced transactions costs

-Additional health and insurance benefits

-Greater economies of scale-marriage pulls two people together, when they move in together they can live together more cheaply as a couple, than as two individuals

-Stronger statement of commitment-the value of the statement of commitment underlie all of these economic benefits. Secondly it is a statement that is recognized and reinforced by people outside the marriage.

-Greater validation and societal acceptance of relationship

-More positive workplace outcomes from reduced discrimination-psych research, gay and lesbian people in workplace facing discrimination have different work experiences and economic gains from the workplace.

Same-sex couples who are not allowed to marry may feel in their workplace that they are treated differently from heterosexual couples who are allowed to marry, and that being unable to marry may affect their ability to get promotions, raises, etc.

-Some of these costs may not be quantifiable, but they are substantial and are imposed on virtually all California same-sex couples who would marry if they could.

Frank and Joe Capley-Alfano, the first same-sex couple recognized within the Free Masons, are registered domestic partners who were married in 2008. Frank is an elevator mechanic and gets his health insurance benefits from the National Elevator Industry Health Benefits Plan (NEIHBP) through the International Union of Elevator Constructors (IUEC) Local 8.

Joe has a degenerative physical condition that requires medical treatment for he will lose the ability to walk. He and Frank petitioned the IUEC beginning in 2004 for medical benefits. Because of DOMA, IUEC does not have to provide a member’s domestic partner or same-sex spouse the health care benefits it provides to opposite-sex spouse.

After six years of petitioning Local 8, who could have simply chosen to begin recognizing state sanctioned same-sex marriages, civil unions, and domestic partnerships, Local 8 agreed to provide Joe and Frank and others same-sex couples married ONLY in California during the 5 month period before Proposition 8 passed access health benefits.

However, because of the fall back on the federal DOMA they are refusing to recognize marriages performed in other states and California registered domestic partners. A lesbian whose family is affected by this inequality spoke at the vigil on 1-11-10. One partner is having to work a second job to provide for her partner and infant child.

MARRIAGE EQUALITY IS THE GOLD STANDARD

In 2008, the number of same-sex marriages in California far exceeded the number of domestic partnerships: 18,000 marriages and 2,077 domestic partnerships.

SAME-SEX COUPLES ENTER INTO MARRIAGE AT HIGHER RATES THAN OTHER INSTITUTIONS

Below is the percentage of same-sex couples who entered into these institutions the first year they were legal.

37%=Marriages in the first year that they were allowed to marry 12%=Civil Unions 10%=Domestic Partnerships

In California only 5% of couples registered as domestic partners in the first year (2000).

11:00 AM

Bois asks Badgett about couples who chose not to enter into domestic partnerships and the financial impact on this because of this choice. Badgett says they are numerous financial drawbacks for same-sec couples not to enter into domestic partnerships, but many LGBT people may choose not to because it relegates a second class status and when evaluating “the value” of domestic partnership it is significantly less than marriage.

Badgett also discusses the benefits of same sex marriage to couples and their children. Counsel submits a document entitled “The Effects of Marriage Equality in Massachusetts,” that reports that

“Over 72% of respondents felt more committed to their partners, almost 70% felt more accepted by their communities, and 93% of those raising children in their homes agreed or somewhat agreed that their children were happier and better off as a result of their marriage.”

This shows again that marriage helps stabilize relationships and keeps people together. It’s reminiscent of how the right wing chastises gay people for not being able to stay in long-term relationships and yet wishes to deny gay people access to marriage which supports long-term commitments.

THE MONEY YOU COULD BE SAVING WITH MARRIAGE EQUALITY

According to Badgett, the state and local governments are losing out on $40 million dollars by denying same-sex couples the right to marry.

According to the Williams Institute’s reports, same-sex marriage would save state governments money on state means-tested public benefits programs. They found that because a single person’s benefits are based on their income alone and a married person’s income is based on the couple’s combined household income, fewer people would be eligible for state benefits, saving the state significant amounts of money.

I have a whole chapter on this in my new book “Love Warriors: The Rise of the Marriage Equality Movement and Why It Will Prevail”-April 2010

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

LEE BADGETT-THE COSTS OF MARRIAGE DISCRIMINATION 1-19-10 Blog #2

Posted On: 2010-01-19 12:48:07

THE COSTS OF MARRIAGE DISCRIMINATION 1-19-10 Blog #2

M.V. Lee Badgett, Ph.D., a professor of economics at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst and the Research Director of the Williams’ Institute at UCLA. She was called to testify about the private harms caused by Prop. 8 and the impact of same-sex marriage on the marriages of different-sex couples.

Badgett has a BA in economics from the University of Chicago (1982) and a PhD in economics from UC Berkeley (1990). Her book, “Money, Myths, and Change: The Economic Lives of Lesbians and Gay Men” (University of Chicago Press) presents her ground-breaking work on sexual orientation discrimination and family policy. Her new book “When Gay People Get Married,” asks whether same-sex marriage will change marriage or change GLB people, drawing on the U.S. and European experiences with same-sex marriage.

Photo https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/about/staff/Pages/default.aspx

Professor Badgett’s Opinions Fall into 4 Categories

1. Prop 8 has inflicted economic harm on same-sex couples residing in California and their children

2. Permitting same-sex couples to marry will not adversely affect heterosexual couples or marriage

3. Same-sex couples are similar to different sex couples in most economic and demographic characteristics

4. Prop 8 imposed substantial economic losses on California and its counties and municipalities.

THE INABILITY TO MARRY INFLICTS ECONOMIC HARMS ON SAME-SEX COUPLES IN MANY WAY

-Marriage confers numerous economic benefits many of which are not provided by DPS

-Greater specialization of labor

-Reduced transactions costs

-Additional health and insurance benefits

-Greater economies of scale-marriage pulls two people together, when they move in together they can live together more cheaply as a couple, than as two individuals

-Stronger statement of commitment-the value of the statement of commitment underlie all of these economic benefits. Secondly it is a statement that is recognized and reinforced by people outside the marriage.

-Greater validation and societal acceptance of relationship

-More positive workplace outcomes from reduced discrimination-psych research, gay and lesbian people in workplace facing discrimination have different work experiences and economic gains from the workplace.

Same-sex couples who are not allowed to marry may feel in their workplace that they are treated differently from heterosexual couples who are allowed to marry, and that being unable to marry may affect their ability to get promotions, raises, etc.

-Some of these costs may not be quantifiable, but they are substantial and are imposed on virtually all California same-sex couples who would marry if they could.

Frank and Joe Capley-Alfano, the first same-sex couple recognized within the Free Masons, are registered domestic partners who were married in 2008. Frank is an elevator mechanic and gets his health insurance benefits from the National Elevator Industry Health Benefits Plan (NEIHBP) through the International Union of Elevator Constructors (IUEC) Local 8.

Joe has a degenerative physical condition that requires medical treatment for he will lose the ability to walk. He and Frank petitioned the IUEC beginning in 2004 for medical benefits. Because of DOMA, IUEC does not have to provide a member’s domestic partner or same-sex spouse the health care benefits it provides to opposite-sex spouse.

After six years of petitioning Local 8, who could have simply chosen to begin recognizing state sanctioned same-sex marriages, civil unions, and domestic partnerships, Local 8 agreed to provide Joe and Frank and others same-sex couples married ONLY in California during the 5 month period before Proposition 8 passed access health benefits.

However, because of the fall back on the federal DOMA they are refusing to recognize marriages performed in other states and California registered domestic partners. A lesbian whose family is affected by this inequality spoke at the vigil on 1-11-10. One partner is having to work a second job to provide for her partner and infant child.

MARRIAGE EQUALITY IS THE GOLD STANDARD

In 2008, the number of same-sex marriages in California far exceeded the number of domestic partnerships: 18,000 marriages and 2,077 domestic partnerships.

SAME-SEX COUPLES ENTER INTO MARRIAGE AT HIGHER RATES THAN OTHER INSTITUTIONS

Below is the percentage of same-sex couples who entered into these institutions the first year they were legal.

37%=Marriages in the first year that they were allowed to marry 12%=Civil Unions 10%=Domestic Partnerships

In California only 5% of couples registered as domestic partners in the first year (2000).

11:00 AM

Bois asks Badgett about couples who chose not to enter into domestic partnerships and the financial impact on this because of this choice. Badgett says they are numerous financial drawbacks for same-sec couples not to enter into domestic partnerships, but many LGBT people may choose not to because it relegates a second class status and when evaluating “the value” of domestic partnership it is significantly less than marriage.

Badgett also discusses the benefits of same sex marriage to couples and their children. Counsel submits a document entitled “The Effects of Marriage Equality in Massachusetts,” that reports that

“Over 72% of respondents felt more committed to their partners, almost 70% felt more accepted by their communities, and 93% of those raising children in their homes agreed or somewhat agreed that their children were happier and better off as a result of their marriage.”

This shows again that marriage helps stabilize relationships and keeps people together. It’s reminiscent of how the right wing chastises gay people for not being able to stay in long-term relationships and yet wishes to deny gay people access to marriage which supports long-term commitments.

THE MONEY YOU COULD BE SAVING WITH MARRIAGE EQUALITY

According to Badgett, the state and local governments are losing out on $40 million dollars by denying same-sex couples the right to marry.

According to the Williams Institute’s reports, same-sex marriage would save state governments money on state means-tested public benefits programs. They found that because a single person’s benefits are based on their income alone and a married person’s income is based on the couple’s combined household income, fewer people would be eligible for state benefits, saving the state significant amounts of money.

I have a whole chapter on this in my new book “Love Warriors: The Rise of the Marriage Equality Movement and Why It Will Prevail”-April 2010

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

A Change of Heart for Marriage Equality

Posted On: 2010-01-19 11:01:15

A CHANGE OF HEART FOR MARRIAGE EQUALITY

Day 6 Prop 8 Trial

Jan. 19, 2010

Driving rain and wind gusts of up to 51 mph reported in San Francisco. Day 6 of the Prop 8 trial begins. Today’s witnesses are Lee Badget, Williams Institute, UCLA, Jerry Sanders, current mayor of San Diego who has a lesbian daughter, and Ryan Kendall, a gay man who experienced conversion therapy.

The morning started with Judge Walker having a bit of a challenge with Mr. Cooper whose response to Walker’s question about when he would return a response in regard to discovery and he stated to City Attorney Dennis Herrera, “Attorney, Mr. Flynn needs counseling on proper objections in deposition. Do a little wood-shedding of some of your lawyers.”

Dennis Hererra then called Mayor Jerry Sanders to the stand.

Jerry Sanders is a Republican, mayor for 4 years of San Diego. He’s in his second term. Sanders was a 1973 police recruit, Sgt. in 1979, policing squads of officers, Lt, 1981, swat commander, director of Police Academy, 1986 promoted to Captain, Commander 1990, Asst. Chief, Chief of Police 1993, retired in 1999, United Way 1999-2002. He is on his second marriage and has two daughters, Jamie straight, Lisa lesbian.

Sanders said Lisa “called in her sophomore year of college said she wanted to talk to us in person. When she got home, she sat down and told us she was a lesbian and in a lesbian relationship.”

He said that when she told him he “felt an overwhelming love, but I realized how difficult it was for her (emotion in voice) to come out to her parents. We told her that we loved her more than we ever would and we would support her every step of the way. I thought it was tough on gay people in society, I was proud of her for letting us know.”

Sanders was a police officer in San Diego for 26 years and said “I’d seen what happened to people who were gay. It was the 1970s San Diego was very conservative. We had a Sergeant who came out and told us he was gay and he was literally driven out of the police department. I’ve seen violence against the gay community simple because people were gay, gay bashings, death in the early 90s, I heard the slurs and the comments that people make.”

GROUNDED IN PREJUDICE

I used to believe civil unions were a fair alternative. In September 2007, the city of San Diego, City Council passed a resolution supporting San Francisco in a lawsuit in favor of marriage equality for same-sex couples. I had to make a decision to veto or sign the resolution my decision was sign the resolution.”

Sanders stated that his previous belief that civil unions are fair is grounded in prejudice and when he realized that he was prejudiced he decided not to veto the resolution in support of marriage equality.

You can see the videotape of the press conference on why he is signing resolution in support of marriage equality at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rfea8iEGNw&NR=1

Here is a transcription.

“My plan was to veto the resolution. My opinion on this issue (gay marriage) has evolved. The arrival of the resolution, to sign or to veto, in my office late last night, forced me to reflect and search my soul for the right thing to do. I’ve decided to lead with my heart, which is probably obvious at the moment. (He says choked up with emotion.) To do what I think is right and to take a stand on equality and social justice. The right thing for me to do is to sign this resolution.

For three decades, I’ve worked to bring justice, enlightenment, and equality to all parts of our community. As I reflected on the choices I had before me last night, I could not bring myself to tell an entire group of people in our community they were less important, less worthy, or less deserving of the rights and responsibilities of marriage than anyone else simply because of their sexual orientation.

A decision to veto this resolution would have been inconsistent with the values I’ve embraced over the past thirty years. I do believe that times have changed and with changing time and new life experiences come different opinions. Two years ago I believed civil unions were a fair alternative. Those beliefs in my case have changed. The concept of a separate, but equal, institution is not something I can support.

I have close family members, friends and members of my personal staff who are gay. I want for them the same thing that we all want for our loved ones—to for each of them to find a mate whom they love deeply and who loves them back. Someone whom they can grow old together and share life’s experiences, and I want their relationships to be protected equally under the law. In the end, I couldn’t look them in the face and tell them that their relationship, their lives, were any less meaningful then the life I share with my wife.”

In his testimony Sanders shared that “gay people would walk by my house and tell me ‘we are a family just like you are,’ and they shared with my how marriage discrimination hurt them.”

“I supported the resolution because I think it is in the interest of government. I know how easy it is to discriminate against people when you see it in the leadership” Sanders said. “If government tolerates discrimination for any reason it’s an excuse for the public to act the same way, and this had led to violence against gays and lesbians in San Diego.”

Sanders went on to say that “when the government denies fundamental rights to people it empowers others to commit hate crimes.”

“In the early days, there were a lot of gay bashings.” Sanders reported in his testimony. “Young men would get drunk and go out and gay bash people. In 2006, an individual brought a baseball bat to gay pride and beat several people with a baseball bat, and almost beat one man to death.”

Sanders spoke about how when he “was a young cop in the 70s, I participated in the slurs and the comments in the locker room. There was a sergeant who was a good cop and he was driven out of the force. I felt fundamentally that was not right!”

When discussing his own prejudice, Sanders asked, “How can someone who has been committed to equality for all people be prejudiced against anyone? I was on the board of director for Christians and Jews, I was a board chair, I participated in diversity workshops, two rounds of diversity training with the city, yet the fact that I still believed that civil unions were equal, really shook me, because the decision I made was grounded in prejudice, I was discriminating against my own daughter and her relationship.”

Sanders spoke about his daughter-in-law, Megan who married his daughter, Lisa in Vermont in December 2009. “She’s been an excellent partner for my daughter, but Megan is like another piece of my family…they deserve to have the same rights.”

When asked what he thought of the Yes on 8 campaign materials, Sanders said, “I don’t know why children would need to be protected from my daughter, Lisa, who is the most loving compassionate person I know.”

CROSS-EXAMINATI0N 9:20 AM

Brian Raum began the cross-examination of Mayor Sanders.

Raum is asking Mayor Sanders questions to show that his belief that there is no discrimination against LGBT people because there are openly gay and lesbian members of city council, there are fewer hate crimes against gays since the 1970s when he first started working in the police department, and because the police department has worked to reach out to improve relationships with the gay and lesbian community.

Raum is showing Sanders a Yes Prop 8 commercial. “Marriage between a man and a woman is hardly a controversial idea….Marriage binds men and women for one reason the raising of children.”

The rest of the commercial talks about how the supporters of Prop 8 have called Yes on 8 supporters “intolerant, offensive, bigots,” and how they vandalized and stole Yes on 8 signs, damaged the property of Yes on 8 supporters and intimidated Yes on 8 supporters.

Raum is making the case that No on 8 people were violent against Yes on 8 supporters. I can’t speak for everyone, but I can say that I personally experienced intimidation on numerous occasions by Yes on 8 people in my own neighborhood.

POSTING 10:00 AM

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

21 BOGUS REASONS WHY GENDER MATTERS

Posted On: 2010-01-15 22:31:10

21 BOGUS REASONS WHY GENDER MATTERS

During the Prop8 campaign Ron Prentiss reportedly distributed a booklet to churches that included an article entitled '21 Reasons Why Gender Matters' Examines Gender Disorientation Pathology And Social Policy, and made up his own psychological terminology “Gender Disorientation Pathology,” as any first year psychology graduate student with knowledge of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM-TR) would know.

Dr. Lamb obviously had never heard of it either.

Dr. Lamb refuted the 21 reasons with peer-reviewed research and literature.

At least four of the reasons were just complete make believe.

15. “Healthy gender development prevents individuals from developing compulsive obsessive disorders leading to sexual addiction and other pathologies.” (The terminology is actually obsessive compulsive disorders ask any psych grad student).

16. “Gender disorientation pathology is a symptom of family dysfunction, personality disorder, father absence, health malfunction or sexual abuse.”

17. “Gender disorientation pathology will lead to increased levels of drug abuse and partner violence.”

21. “Gender disorientation pathology encourages the sexual and psychological exploitation of children.”

Go to: http://www.familyaction.org/Articles/issues/sexuality/gender-matters.htm

If you wish to read the pseudo-psychological 21 reasons.

YES ON 8 CAMPAIGN USED BOGUS MADE UP RESEARCH AND TERMINOLOGY

Apparently, in the booklet, Prentiss makes statements that “12% of children of lesbian became active lesbians themselves.”

Dr. Lamb says this is inaccurate according to extensive research on children of same-sex parents.

GAYS NOT MORE LIKELY TO ABUSE THAN HETEROSEXUALS

Prentiss states-The sad truth is that homosexual abuse of children is higher than heterosexuals. It is the right of the child to know and have a relationship with bio parent. GENDER ORIENTATION PATHOLOGY increases the risk that children will suffer sexual exploitation. It is our duty to protect them.”

Lamb refutes all of the above and states that gays are no more likely to sexually abuse children than heterosexuals and reiterates that there is no such concept or disorder called GENDER ORIENTATION PATHOLOGY. He asserts that there is three decades of research refuting this myth and that children are most likely to get hurt by school bullies who don’t respect or accept their LGBT parents.

POST-LUNCH CROSS EXAMINATION OF LAMB-SORRY THIS IS A BIT OUT OF ORDER

Defendant Council Thompson begins focusing on research that step-fathers are more likely to abuse their step-children then biological fathers. He’s not arguing for covenant-no divorce marriage (yet), but he seems hell-bent to say that all step-fathers and anyone non-biologically related to the child is a menace to that child, to wipe out all non-biological parents from capable child-rearing.

First, it is true some step-fathers molest their children. I ran a sexual abuse survivors program for ten years when I worked as a psychologist for the Federal Bureau of Prisons. There were many women who had been sexually abused by their biological parents too. Does that mean that WE should take children away from their biological fathers because of the chance, that being men, they might abuse their children?

Second, this case is about marriage. Couples who never or can’t have biological children can marry and no one is rushing to pass constitutional amendments to take away their marriage rights. Also, have you noticed, same-sex couples are already, legally raising children, but I’m not naïve, I know that they are hoping to use this kind of bogus logic to take away same-sex couples rights to parent and adopt. They just did in Arkansas last year.

GRANDPARENTS CAN BE IMPORTANT TO A CHILD’S PSYCHOLOGICAL ADJUSTMENT, CORRECT?

Thompson- So the grandparents’ financial contributions to children make a difference in their lives, correct? Clearly we note that the psychological well-being of parents affects their ability to parent and the quality of relationship with their children.

Holy Research Twisting Batman!

Thompson is now taking the fact that some straight parents of LGBT people reject their children and so are not involved in their grandchildren’s lives and that this hurts these kids—the implication that kids would be better off with straight parents because their parents don’t reject them.

Okay my friend’s Ashle and Kinna have two wonderful daughters and the grandparents are extremely involved in their grandbabies’ lives. My friend, Maurie, a straight mom of a lesbian daughter and proud grandmother of two, is extremely active in her grandchildren’s lives and is more than happy to show you the beautiful picture of her grandchildren as ring bearer and flower girl at their mothers’ long-awaited legal marriage before Prop 8 passed.

Should they be denied their constitutional rights because some straight parents/grandparents are stifled in the current ability to accept their LGBT children? Should straight people who have difficulties with their parents and have been disowned for various reasons or chosen themselves to cut off communication lose their right to a marriage license? Again I think the answers are obvious here. And similar arguments were used to keep interracial couples from marrying.

GAYS SUFFER FROM MINORITY DISTRESS

While the psychological research shows that LGBT people experience minority distress due to homophobia and discrimination, Thompson decides to take the implication to an illogical conclusion.

He is also making the point that because LGBT people suffer minority distress, which leads to anxiety and depression, and because depression and anxiety effects parenting, LGBT parents do not make good parents. Wow!

I wonder what he says about People of Color who also experience minority distress due to racism and discrimination. I’m sure somewhere in there these folks may be advocating for fewer babies of color, remember they are very concerned with population growth, and believe that gay marriage will lead to the population dying out.

When I debated Maggie Gallagher at Brown University in 2006, she spoke with concern about the reduction of children being born in Western Europe. I could be wrong, but it sure seemed like she was suggesting that not enough white babies were being born, cause as far as I can tell, there’s no overall global shortage of babies being born.

IS IT ALMOST OVER YET

Thompson-“Dr. Lamb likes to talk about these rich, deep studies, but you don’t have any knowledge if these studies had control groups with biological, married parents which is the core of our case.”

Judge Walker interceded and says to Counsel Thompson. “We’re trying a case is there a way to shorten your questions.”

I agree. My brain and body are starting to check out. I tend to dissociate a bit when Thompson steps up for cross-examination. He is quite annoying and his disdain for educated people, reality, facts, and gay people make me feel like I’ve been watching FOX news for hours. I can only take this stuff in doses, that’s why I watch the Daily Show with John Stuart, at least there are funny jokes in between his reports of the assault on logic, truth, and human decency.

Did I mention that there was a huge group of Stanford Law Students here today?

REDIRET

Discussing Michael Rosenfeld study based on U.S. Census

Lamb-It is the only study we have, a rare study, which compares all the children in the country in the environments that they are reared, couple thousand children raised by lesbians, with couples thousand children raised by gay male couples, compared to children raised by heterosexual couples.

Matthew D. McGill Plaintiffs’ Attorney-In your experience is a sample based on U.S. census adequate to be reliable?

Lamb-Yes.

McGill-Why does it make sense to maintain a control group of heterosexual couples raising children?

Lamb-Seems most appropriate control group.

McGill-Why?

Lamb-Because you have unmarried couples in all of those groups. Children adopted into two parent family and children in bio family.

The point is to answer Thompson’s early assertion that none of the research used only heterosexual married couple with biological children. If they had, it would not have been an accurate group to compare with gay parents who are not legally married and some children their children are biologically, others are adopted, and some are from IVF and other forms of alternative insemination. The researchers chose to be in the real world, acknowledging the diversity and variation of families, rather than embracing only one family type.

And speaking of typing, my wife wants to know. Are you done yet.

Yes dear, for tonight.

GAY ON TRIAL

Tomorrow I’ll blog about Helen Zia, the only witness who openly discusses her sexual orientation.

SPECIAL THANKS TO MY BROTHER AND WEB-DESIGNER RICHARD KOTULSKI, WHO HAS PROVIDED ME WITH TREMENDOUS TECH SUPPORT THIS WEEK AND LAST.

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

rick.kaplowitz@gmail.com says:

The "logic" of the grandparents portion of that questioning is so twisted that it made me wonder ... I'm a [more-or-less ] straight grandparent of three. If one or more of those kids turns out to be gay, would the prop8 folks argue that the gay kid(s) and I should be prohibited from seeing and loving each other ??? That makes about as much sense, of course, as the rest of their argument -- or, maybe its just Granparent Disorientation Pathology.

Posted on: 2010-01-18

bbradford@cooley.com says:

Davina you are inspirational.So are our Attorneys in the Prop 8 case, and I wrote to thank them today: Thank you for standing up for me, and my rights. This is an historic moment in our history, in our country and for me personally. The passage of Prop 8 changed my life completely, from a single Dad just taking care of my sons to a “Gay Activist’ according to the press. I live in the Bay Area and I am using vacation time from work to attend the trial, to watch history being made. I feel like this case will be remembered as a major step in the long and difficult path of civil rights, and it will mark a turning point in the struggle for LGBT equality. Thank you for helping us, and inspiring me. Kind regards, Billy Bradford Castro Valley, CA

Posted on: 2010-01-17

CROSS-EXAMINATION: LET THE BADGERING BEGIN

Posted On: 2010-01-15 13:14:57

CROSS-EXAMINATION: LET THE BADGERING BEGIN

Thompson steps up to the plate and starts his rapid fire questioning again.

You are a member of the ACLU, correct?

You are a member of… asks 10 more questions about his membership.

You give money to PBS, so you are a committed liberal, correct?

Then he attacks him by saying he has no clinical experience as a psychologist, he is only a researcher?

You are not a clinical psych, never done therapy before, correct?

You have not interviewed a child for over 20 years, correct?

(DUH-That’s what graduate students and research assistants are for!)

If you look at the Homer Simpson’s of the world, they are much more likely to be men than women, correct?

Breast feeding is better for children and men can’t breast feed is that correct?

Women earn less money than men, correct?

There are differences between the earning power of gay men and lesbians, correct?

Lesbians earn less than heterosexuals, correct?

Lee Badger, (actually her name is Badgett, but badgering is what you are doing and perhaps you were thinking of another small mammal), she says contrary to popular stereotype after controlling for race, age, male couples’ income is 4% higher than heterosexuals income, and female couples is 7% lower than married couples.

WOMEN SPEND MONEY DIFFERENTLY THAN MEN WITH REGARD TO CHILDREN

Women spend money differently than men with regard to children, correct?

Gender is associated with certain occupations correct?

Gender is assoc with educational opportunities, correct?

Men are more likely to perpetrate sexual abuse than women, correct? So step-fathers are more likely to sexually and physically abuse children than mothers correct?

Men who are married are less likely to drink heavily and gamble, correct?

Just to be clear, Dr. Lamb is qualifying all of his responses with intelligent arguments that I can't capture as quickly and Thompson's statements.

WHO ARE THE PEOPLE IN THE OVERFLOW ROOM?

“I didn’t know any of what Lamb discussed. Frankly, I don’t care about all those studies. I’m just a parent. I know what kind of job I do, I know a number of gay parents and I know what kind of parents they are. When they say gays are child molesters-- that hurts my heart.” Billy gay parent, father of two children.

Niko and Lorna, a multi-racial lesbian couple from San Francisco stood in line to enter the court room. The committed couple said they were there because they went to get a domestic partnership in San Francisco and found out that as a same-sex couple they had to pay $23 more than heterosexual couples applying for a domestic partnership certificate.

“Why should we have to pay more for a domestic partnership registration than straight couples?” The couple said that they were told by SF clerks that the $23 went to pay for an LGBT education fund. “Why can’t straight people pay the extra $23 for the LGBT educational fund?” I told them this was the first I ever heard of this.

Court on lunch break!

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

CHILDREN RAISED BY GAY AND LESBIAN PARENTS ARE JUST AS WELL ADJUSTED AS CHILDREN RAISED BY HETEROSEXUAL PARENTS PROP 8 TRIAL: Day 5

Posted On: 2010-01-15 11:14:09

CHILDREN RAISED BY GAY AND LESBIAN PARENTS ARE JUST AS WELL ADJUSTED AS CHILDREN RAISED BY HETEROSEXUAL PARENTS

Michael Lamb, PhD discussed the impact of same-sex marriage on children. Lamb is the author of The Role of the Father in Child Development and co-author of Child Care and Its Impact on Young Children (2-5) published by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, USA (2004).

Lamb, is a Prof at University of Cambridge, England. For seventeen years, he was the head of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. Since the 1970s, for nearly 40 years, Lamb has conducted research about children’s social and emotional development. He is achieved prestigious awards for his lifetime contributions to psychology.

He has two primary areas of study:

1. investigation of sex crimes involving children and interviewing children who are young victims.

2 factors that affect children’s adjustment, those aspects of children’s development that allow them to function effectively in their environment and to interact effectively with society, adjusted.

He stated that over the past 40 years there are over 100 peer reviewed professional articles on children being raised by G &L parents.

He has two opinions on same-sex marriage with regard to LGBT people raising children. He state:

1. Children raised by G&L are just as well-adjusted as children raised by heterosexual parents.

2. The emotional and social adjustment of children raised by G&L parents would promoted if their parents could get married.

Lamb says that the consensus over 40 years of research indicate that there are three broad factors that impact the healthy adjustment of a child.

1. The quality of relationship with parent or parent figures.

2. The quality of relationship between the two parents or significant adults.

3. The environment the child is raised in has adequate economic and social resources.

Lamb states that “a good parent is someone who is committed to, loves the child, is engaged with the child, focuses attention on that child, can read the child’s signals, has an understanding of what the child needs, provides the child with stimulation, and provides appropriate guidance for and limits on that child.”

WHAT MAKES AN EFFECTIVE PARENT IS THE SAME REGARDLESS IF THE PARENT IS A MOTHER OR A FATHER

Attorney’s introduced a quote from President Obama that stated “Statistics show that children who grow up without a father are 5xs more likely to live in poverty & commit crime, 9xs more likely to drop out of schools, 20xs more likely to end up in prison.”

Lamb says that “actually the factors that better explain this is not that there is no father it is that these children grow up in households with more conflict between parents, have fewer economic resources…”

According to Lamb, “our research on masculine and feminine parents has made clear that that initial prediction ( a child needs a mother and a father as parents) is incorrect. We’ve come to a new conclusion. What makes a good parent is the same for either a male or a female, a child does not specifically need a mother or a father.”

The attorney asks Lamb to read a policy statement from the American Psychological Association in support of marriage equality for same-sex couples and their families. He then reads the names of the following organizations who have also submitted policy statements affirming same-sex marriage.

American Psychological Association

American Academy of Child Psychology

American Pediatric

Psychiatric Association

Psychoanalytic Association

Child Welfare League of America

Social Workers

North American Council on Adoptable Children

MORE ON RON PRENTISS’S 21 REASONS GENDER MATTERS IN NEXT BLOG, STAY TUNED

THE COST OF MARRIAGE DISCRIMINATION

Yesterday, Edmund Egan, PhD. San Francisco’s Chief Economist, spoke about the cost of discrimination to the City & County of San Francisco. Egan discussed all the lost revenue in marriage licenses and weddings since Prop 8 passed and stopped happy couples from saying “I do.” Just a little tease, my new book Love Warriors: The Rise of the Marriage Equality Movement and Why It Will Prevail explores in greater detail the cost of marriage discrimination across the nation. Children raised by G&L parents are NOT more likely to develop a gender identity disorder.

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

INSPIRING VIDEO OF SUNRISE VIGIL FOR PROP 8 FEDERAL TRIAL

Posted On: 2010-01-14 13:17:15

INSPIRING VIDEO OF SUNRISE VIGIL FOR PROP 8 FEDERAL TRIAL

Since there will be no live coverage of today’s trial and I have to work and do laundry today, I’ve included several links to the Sunrise Vigil, for and against marriage equality and a list of the Witnesses (thanks Pam Brown). If you are interested google them and learn more so you have the who’s who.

And to be clear from my last blog, the Aggresive Acts By Gay Rights Supporters that was their frame not mine and I do know these folks lie. LGBTIQ people, including myself, have long been the victims of hate speech, violence, and crime. I don't put it past these folks to cry victim, when the reverse is true. They are the bullies. But we are all human.

I follow the teachings Dr. Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., whose birthday is tomorrow, who worked with African-American men and women and their allies, to always embrace non-violent means.

In fact, the National Civil Rights Museum in Memphis Tennessee, where Dr. King was taken from us, has video of non-violent teachings where young people are at lunch counters being taunted by segregationists, cigarette ashes and milk-shakes dumped on their head, they are called horrible names, and yet, these activists are calm, graceful, and committed to their cause.

National Civil Rights Museum Memphis

Now, I'm not saying, we should let people beat us up. If someone comes at me, I'm calling 911 and making a police report. I am saying that it behooves us to channel our anger in organzing and educating, but not in yelling matches with oppostion or other foolish endeavors.

Back in the court room tomorrow.

Sunrise Vigil Video

MEET THE WITNESSES

Plaintiffs Witnesses (one's with ** are also on Defendant's list)

Kristin Perry (plaintiff)**

Sandra Stier (plaintiff)**

Paul Katami (plaintiff)**

Jeffrey Zarrillo (plaintiff)**

MV Lee Badgett, PhD (Williams’ Institute UCLA)**

Nancy Cott, PhD (history of marriage)**

George Chauncey, PhD (history of discrimination)**

Daniel Hamermesh, PhD (economic value of marriage)**

Gregory Herek, PhD (antigay stigma and other psychological issues)**

Michael Lamb, PhD (impact on children)**

Ilan Meyer, PhD (stigma and prejudice)**

Letitia Anne Pepla, PhD (benefits of marriage)**

Gary Segura, PhD (political vulnerability of gays)**

Edmund Egan, PhD (costs of discrimination to City & County)**

Jerry Sanders (San Diego Mayor)

Helen Zia (Asian American lesbian - impact of being denied marriage and importance of it)

William Rogers (gay man with two sons and importance of marriage)

Ryan Kendall (gay man subjected to conversion therapy)

Dennis Hollingsworth (Proponent of Prop 8 - genesis, strategy and execution of campaign)

Gail Knight (Proponent of Prop 8 - genesis, strategy and execution of campaign) I believe she is the widow of Senator Pete Knight of Prop 22

Martin Gutierrez (Proponent of Prop 8 - genesis, strategy and execution of campaign)

Mark Jansson (Proponent of Prop 8 - genesis, strategy and execution of campaign)

Ron Prentice (Yes on 8 Exec Council - genesis, strategy and execution of campaign)

Edward "Ned" Dolejsi (Yes on 8 Exec Committee member - genesis, strategy and execution of campaign)

Andrew Pugno (Protect Marriage Council - genesis, strategy and execution of campaign)

Frank Schubert (Protect Marriage Campaign Manager - genesis, strategy and execution of campaign)

Jeff Flint (Protect Marriage Campaign Manager - genesis, strategy and execution of campaign)

Does #1-20 (Unnamed persons - genesis, strategy and execution of campaign)

James Garlow (Senior Pastor of Skyline Wesleyan, Active in Yes on 8 campaign - genesis, strategy and execution of campaign)

Mike McPherson (Senior Pastor of Rock Church, Active in Yes on 8 campaign - genesis, strategy and execution of campaign)

Bill May (Catholics for a Common Good, Active in Yes on 8 campaign - genesis, strategy and execution of campaign)

Bill Criswell (Marketing Communications Services, Prop 8 Vendor - genesis, strategy and execution of campaign)

David Blankenhorn (Founder of Institute of American Values)** Loren Marks (Professor at Lousiana State, purports one man-one woman good for child )**

Paul Nathanson, PhD (McGill Religious Studies Professor)**

Katherine Young (McGill Professors, purports to know about religion and marriage)**

Daniel Robinson, PhD (Oxford Philosophy, purports to know about sexual orientation)**

Kenneth Miller, PhD (Assoc Prof at Claremont McKenna - purports to understand political power)**

Douglas Allen (Prof of Econ at Simon Fraser University, purports to know about same sex marriage)

Separate Defendants Witnesses

City & County of San Francisco Clerk California Secretary of State

OPPONENTS OF MARRIAGE EQUALITY VIDEO INTERVIEWS FROM SUNRISE VIGIL 1/11/10

“How do you know I’m heterosexual?” Luke Otterstad

Frankly, I thought he and his friend looked like cute gay guys. I know I wasn’t the only one.

< a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIm53IDHaqk"> Luke Otterstad Vladimir Musorvichi

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

AGGRESSIVE VIOLENT ACTS BY SUPPORTERS OF LGBT RIGHTS

Posted On: 2010-01-13 14:27:58

AGGRESSIVE VIOLENT ACTS BY SUPPORTERS OF LGBT RIGHTS

 

Back from Break, 10:24 AM, Thompson begins introducing evidence that Yes8 people were attacked by No8 people, death threats, boycotts, defaced churches, and an elderly couple beaten up.

 

While this is all hearsay to me, I want to speak to two things.

 

First, I was one of those people who was verbally and almost physically, assaulted during the Prop 8 campaign in my hometown Oakland, California.

 

Following the Prop 8 state trial I began receiving death threats from a man who called my home and sent me e-mails calling me a “fucking dyke” while simultaneously identifying himself as a Christian.

 

I was concerned because Molly and I were community grand marshals for the SF Pride Parade and were going to ride in a convertible car down Market St during gay pride. I had images of JFK’s assassination running through my head as the phone calls continued. I filed a police report, eventually the calls stopped.

 

Second, again the Yeson8 reports of being victimized are hearsay, but mindful we should be as we advance our equality to maintain non-violence in all aspects of our communication with our opposition. We must not become the bullies.

 

As Ghandi said, the enemy of truth, is untruth, it’s not the person. I invite us to be in a place of compassion wherever possible with our opponents. Knowing that many of our current opponents will one day awaken to their misunderstandings (mistakes) and some may even become active allies in ushering in more equality.

 

The truth is, so many already have.

 

KING AND KING-IT’S A FAIRY TALE-IT’S NOT ABOUT SEX

 

Lawyers for Protectmarriage.com showed footage of the heterosexual couple from Massachusetts who were featured in Yeson8 ads talking about how school children would be forced to learn about gay sex because someone at their son’s school read the book, King and King, and it was not part of the curriculum. The couple say this is forced on kids and parents and they are helpless to change it.

 

Particularly appalling was when the women said, “Our children should not be exposed to sexuality in second grade. Now they are being forced to learn about gay marriage in math, social studies, and reading. Parents have no rights.”

 

Thompson badgered Chauncey asking him shouldn’t parents have a right to decide what their children learn if they oppose the teaching.

 

Chauncey fired back that if parents oppose interracial marriage they can send their child to a private school, but that public schools “are encouraged to teach broader social values,” and he emphasized that the book, King and King, “is a fairy tale, it’s not about gay sex,” as Thompson and the couple tried to frame.

 

IS MARRIAGE AN ADULT ISSUE? IF SO WHAT ARE CHILDREN DOING AT WEDDINGS

 

Chief Deputy Attorney for San Francisco, Terry Stewart asked Professor Chauncey if marriage was an adult issue and if he had ever heard of flower children before. There were a few chuckles in the court room, as Stewart corrected herself and said “flower girls and ring bearers.”

 

She challenges Thompson’s earlier point that even gay people didn’t want marriage, but mentioning that their were many blacks in the segregated South who were also initially uncomfortable with integration with whites for various reasons.

 

HOMOSEXUAL ACTS GO AGAINST THE NATURAL LAW

 

Stewart then asks Chauncey to read some documents by Prop 8 supporters to be submitted as evidence.

 

Chauncey reads-ALLOWING CHILDREN TO BE ADOPTED BY LIVING IN SUCH UNIONS WOULD BE DOING VIOLENCE TO THESE CHILDREN

 

Then Stewart introduces video of a deposition with the Executive Director of the Traditional Family Coalition, Dr. Bill Tam, who volunteered almost all of his time to help ProtectMarriage.com pass Prop 8.

 

Dr. Tam via pre-recorded video:

 

Dr. Tam-I communicated with Ron Prentiss, Andrew Pugno, Frank Schubert…I organized several rallies in support of Prop 8 attended by thousands of voters and raised several thousand dollars and support from Asian-Am community.”

 

Depo Attorney-How did you attract people?

 

Dr. Tam-Notices of rallies at churches.

 

Depo Attorney- Were these venuespublic?

 

Dr. Tam-Yeah. China Town Square. Names some Memorial Park.

 

Depo Atty- Who attended the rallies?

 

Dr. Tam mentions many clergy members and Ron Prentiss and Tony Perkins.

STATEMENT BY DR. TAM PROTECTMARRIAGE.COM SUMMARIZED BY PROF. CHAUNCEY

 

Chauncey summarizes Dr. Tam’s remarks. “This is anti-gay rhetoric, describes right to marry as the legalization of prostitution, put forth by SF city govt  which is under rule of homosexuals, forced on the people, the next step after gay marriage is legalizing sex with children.”

 

IF SAME-SEX MARRIAGE IS LEGAL, EVERY CHILD WOULD GROW UP

THINKING THEY COULD MARRY JOHN OR JANE.

 

Video shows Dr. Tam describing the Gay Agenda.

 

“It is legalizing sex with children-google it,” he says. When asked by the depo attorney is he believes this is true. He evokes his 1st amendment right that he doesn't have to say if believes this.

 

Tam goes on to express his concern that if gay marriage were legal it would lead not only to legalizing sex with children, but it “every child would grow up thinking they could marry John or Jane.”

 

Dr. Tam expressed concern that because of gay marriage, “my daughter wanted to experiment with girls and had trouble getting boys. So the girls tried girls, the children did an experiment.”

 

He also expressed concern about gays calling marriage a civil right. He said, “It’s a concern to Asian Americans that gays call it civil rights, civil rights is about skin color. I cannot change it. If homosexuals portray self as minority than sex preference can become a minority.”

 

And in fact, LGBT people are the minority, but as we continue to grow as a society, we will be a part of a majority of people who believe in equality for LGBTIQ people.

 

I’m sorry to say, but I will not be in the court room again until Friday at 8:30 AM. Follow michaelpetrelis.com for a summary later of the day and Paul Hogarth at www.couragecampaign.org who is doing live blogging.

 

I will however be posting some interviews hopefully at the end of the day.

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

YOU ALL HAVE BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN AND IT EVEN GOT AWARDS--- GAY DISCRIMINATION IS OVER DAY 3 MORNING

Posted On: 2010-01-13 10:49:30

DAY 3 MORNING

YOU ALL HAVE BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN AND IT EVEN GOT AWARDS--- GAY DISCRIMINATION IS OVER

Thompson, the smug attorney for the Proponents of Prop 8, is taking the position that gays are not being discriminated against any more and so that cannot be the reason that Prop 8 passed.

He makes a point and then asks Professor Chauncey if that is correct.

He’s mentioning Will and Grace, the movie Philadelphia, and Brokeback mountain as evidence that LGBT people are not being discriminated again.

NANCY PELOSI IS A GAY RIGHTS CHAMPION, RIGHT?

Did I miss something? Nancy Pelosi is our fierce advocate?

Thompson says she is.

Thompson-“Homosexuals couldn’t get hearings in the 1950s, but today you have Barney Frank and he’s a powerful ally of gays and lesbians, correct?”

Thompson, “You have AIDS funding, isn’t that important to gays and lesbians, correct?”

Thompson, “Thousands of employers have non-discrimination policies, correct?”

PRESIDENTIAL POLICY ON GAYS AND LESBIANS

Thompson- “President Clinton appointed 116 gays to employment, correct?”

Thompson- “He issued presidential orders, barring discrimination in employment, correct?”

Again, I was a federal employee, all the advances Clinton made for LGBT people in the government were immediately revoked or ignored during Bush’s 8 years. It was shocking to see how quickly, we went backwards.

In 1999 and 2000, I held “lunch and learns” on gay issues during gay pride month. The first June Bush was in office, I was no longer welcome to hold such gatherings. And I believe it was Judy Shepard who had been invited to speak at DOJ-Pride in Washington, DC, an LGBT employment group made up of Department of Justice employees, was not allowed to speak in the DOJ board room. DOJ Pride, which had also held “lunch and learns” for gay issues in June, was told that they could no longer meet on DOJ property.

If my memory serves me, a Democratic Senator invited Judy Shepard and DOJ Pride to come use his conference room. That was June 2001, the first year Bush was in office. Believe me, it only got worse until Obama took office eight years later.

ALL MEN AND WOMEN ARE SINNERS, CORRECT?

Christian organizations against gay rights are in the minority, correct?

Thompson trying to show that significant shift in acceptance toward gay people as evidence by the fact that numerous churches support gay rights and read off a list of denominations that support gay people. He also submitted two videos for evidence to show that even the churches are supporting gay people.

One of the signing of the DC marriage equality resolution being signed in a church and then one was an interview of Rick Warren on Fox said that he believed that people show “respect” for “all people regardless of their lifestyle, but I don’t believe in redefining marriage as it’s been the past 5000 years.”

Stay posted for additional postings. Check my facebook and twitter accounts www.twitter.com/drkotulski for more freq updates.

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

SidneyTRifkin@gmail.com says:

Interesting that Rick Warren should comment about changing marriage as it's been for the last 5000 years. There are still societies that do not adhere to the "one man, one woman" philosophy. Mormonism didn't until it became a precondition of Utah's acceptance into the Union that it be outlawed there. The current President of South Africa (is a polygamist. What Warren really means is that in the Judeo-Christian world (minus the early Mormons) one man, one woman has been the rule. But isn't our country based on principles of separation of church and state? Isn't freedom of, and from, religion one of the basic precepts of our system of government? Many of our founding fathers were familiar firsthand with the religious intolerance that pervaded the old world and deliberately set up protections for those who wished to follow their own conscience and live the lifestyle of their choosing. Thank you, Ted Olson, for reminding our country that Freedom is our original watchword and that the power of the government to interfere in people's lives, based entirely on religious principles, needs to be severely limited lest it become a tool of oppression of a religious majority against a minority of any kind.

Posted on: 2010-01-13

HOMOSEXUALITY-- THIS IS YOUR LIFE!

Posted On: 2010-01-13 01:28:32

Davina Kotulski covers Prop 8 trial testimony of Professor George Chauncey, Historian RUSHING TO LUNCH

At 12:30 PM we broke for lunch and raced to the Cafeteria on the 2nd floor of the fed building. I inhaled some sushi because I couldn’t wait for something to cook. I was famished. Can you believe they have a sushi bar at the fed building?

I had lunch with Terry Stewart’s wife and daughter, my wife, and plaintiff for the California Marriage Case John Lewis.

I asked John Lewis to tell me what he thought of the case. He said he was struck by the bravery of the plaintiff couples and said “over the past decade the success of the marriage equality movement can be attributed to LGBTI couples, their family and friends, who have spoken the truth of their lives in every possible setting, with co-workers, at rallies, too media, and even going door to door.”

Lewis said “This takes tremendous courage and belief in one’s dignity to be treated equally under the law and to stand up for your own life and offer that for the betterment of others now and in the future. The plaintiffs offered live testimony of their lives in a court case where they are subjecting themselves to hostile cross examination on the most important part of their lives.”

Well said John! IN THE COURTROOM

Thanks to the wonderful generosity of blogger Michael Petrelis

Michael Petrelis

who shared his media pass with me. I had the chance to sit in the court room for the afternoon testimony by Yale Professor George Chauncey. Stuart Milk, Harvey Milk’s gay nephew, was there. Hoping to do an interview with him tomorrow.

Chauncey is a historian who wrote Why Marriage: The history shaping the debate over gay equality (2004) He is an internationally sought after speaker whose received numerous awards. Go to: Wikipedia

Unfortunately, this is when my computer decided to die.

Chauncey began talking about the widespread discrimination gays and lesbians faced in the public and private arenas, focusing specifically on public accommodation, employment, censorship, stereotyping, and then just plain old discrimination.

HOMOSEXUALITY THIS IS YOUR LIFE

Chauncey’s testimony was like “homosexuality this is your life!” Remember when you could be arrested for association and sodomy? Remember when we called you a degenerate and made up laws to through you in jail for simply being in a bar.

Oh, this one’s great, remember when vagrancy laws were used to ensnare you in California and getting arrested meant the police would, according to Chauncey 1. Call your family to “verify your identity” and out you. 2. Call your landlord to confirm that you lived there and out you. 3. Call your employer to verify your employment and out you.

And remember after prohibition when everyone else could drink, laws were passed to keep you out of the bars. Laws that actually prohibited gays and lesbians being served drinks or the bar would lose its liquor license, so you had to hang out at the bars that were operated by organized crime syndicates. Boy, homosexuality you’ve come a long way baby, except, because of this people still affiliate you with and compare you to criminals.

IF YOU’RE GAY STAY AWAY

I was shocked to learn today that there were actually signs posted outside of bars that said “If you’re gay, stay away” and “it’s against the law to serve homosexuals.” Hmm, what does that remind me of? And if these offensive signs weren’t enough. Cops regularly raided bars looking for homosexuals or people that they thought looked like ‘em.

According to Chauncey, and you older gays probably remember this (I was in the womb during stonewall, literally), plain-clothed policemen would go into bars and look for “stereotypical cross-gender behavior…women with short hair, masculine clothing, swaggering around the bar in ways that women shouldn’t walk..men with colorful clothes, long hair, and greeting each other in a feminine way.”

Chauncey even said that one person he interviewed said that one way to tell was if “two men talking about the opera, something no real man would do.”

Chauncey went on to talk about the legacy of police raiding bars and arresting gay people and referenced the Black Cat Bar raid in San Francisco which lost it’s license in 1949. There was a court ruling that you couldn’t discriminate. But Chauncey said the police continued to crack down on bars with gays.

As we know they continued in 1969 with the Stonewall Inn in NY and even last year in Texas. This legacy, while less frequent Chauncey says, still continues.

Wikipedia link : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Cat_Bar You’re welcome!

A DESPISED CLASS OF PEOPLE, OUTLAWS IN THE EYES OF THE LAW

2:07 PM

Terry Stewart asked Chauncey-How did this effect gay people?

GC- They were a despised class of people, outlaws in the eyes of the law. They needed to take great care and keep secret that they were gay. It more broadly assoc gay life with criminality. Seedy, underbelly of society, associated with organized crime.

GC-WWI military decided to exclude homosexuals and to begin screening procedures to keep gay people out. Not surprisingly, they didn’t ferret people out. Most gays, like their peers, wanted to serve their country and were accustomed to passing as straight. Small town gays were very concerned about keeping that hidden.

PROFOUND CONSEQUENCES—GAYS AND THE MILITARY

Chauncey stated that the military had various procedures in place to keep homosexuals out and that when discovered they were discharged. Sound familiar?

The consequences for those who were discovered to be gay either before or during military service were profound.

Chauncey, “It was humiliating. They were denied benefits under the GI bill even soldiers who served in combat and were kicked out because they were discovered to be gay. They were prohibited from benefits for housing, education, employment, etc. People wanted to see your discharge papers and find out what you were fired for before they hired you which did not help them.”

Chauncey “The War was an important moment of bringing people together.” He mentioned WWII. “Think of the classic WWII movie-The Jew from Brooklyn, the Irish guy from Jersey, the Italian from San Francisco.” Gay men were not able to be a part of this and then were seen as suspect because they were not a part of protecting the country.

The following fact is submitted for evidence--“Over the first 10 years of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell it cost the Defense Dept 95 million dollars.”

HOMOSEXUALS, SEX PERVERTS, AND COMMUNISTS Chauncey went on to talk about what happened after WWII. Things got worse for gays.

He says that in 1950, Joseph Macarthur wanted the names of communists and sex perverts. This led to the formation of top congressional committees on the employment of homosexuals and other sex perverts in Government.

A document entitled something like On the Employment of Homosexuals, Sex Perverts and Communists is submitted to evidence.

Chauncey said that approximately “1,700 people had been prohibited from getting federal jobs” and noted that the State Department “dismissed more suspected homosexuals than communists.”

He said that President Eisenhower also created a policy that homosexuals could not work for the government, be in the military, or work for private companies who had contracts with the government, and that they had to fire their gay employees.

In 1975, Carter rescinded that policy, so that most government agencies no longer were required to fire gays and were able to hire them. But it was not until the 1990s that President Clinton ended that policy in intelligence agencies and prohibited discrimination federal employment for gay employees.

I was hired by the Department of Justice as a psychologist in June 1996 and during my background investigation I came out. The investigator documented that I had revealed I was a homosexual and proceeded to ask me if people knew of my homosexuality. I affirmed that I open about my sexual orientation and found out later that they contacted my employer, my landlord, and many of my friends to confirm that I was a “known homosexual” and therefore could not be blackmailed.

WAITER, HAIDRESSER, CLERICAL WORKER

Chauncey talked about employment discrimination that still exists in at least 20 states.

Terry Stewart asked if discrimination in employment effected “access to jobs in the private sector”

Chauncey-Gay people faced discrimination from a range of employers varied from occupation to occupation, company to company, most people had to hide their homosexuality for fear of losing their job.”

Stewart-Did it limit their job choices or channel them into specific occupations?

Chauncey-A good # of gay people pursued the profession they wanted, hid their identities, but there were also a good number of people who did not want to risk that and were funneled into low status job where their being gay wouldn’t matter.

He mentions waiter, hairdresser, clerical worker.

WE HAD A GAY OLD TIME THIS WEEKEND

Stewart-What were the effects on gay people generally?

Chauncey-gay life was pushed under ground. They had to hide it. Increased the stakes for people. It meant that they were secretive, special codes, gay liberation in the 1970, in 1940s and 1960s, they used the word “gay” as a code word.

CENSORSHIP

Stewart-Can you explain gay people have been subject to censorship?

Chauncey-In the movies, Legion of Decency, led by Catholics to edit films with gay content. Pressured Hollywood.

1934 or 1944 enforced this code. Hayes code.

You had to pay a fine. Prohibited interracial relationships, lesbian and gay characters, discussion of homosexuality.

A generation of Hollywood films could not include gay characters or explore gay lives.

Hollywood screen writers had to submit scripts. Very strictly managed.

TV networks were even more constrained than Hollywood.

1980s as recently as 1989, a pop TV series called 30 something had a scene with two men in bed with sheets, it was so shocking that various religious organizations threatened boycotts and it was not shown at all, putting a chilling effect on the inclusion of gay characters.

Gay people didn’t know there were other gay people like themselves. Older gays didn’t see themselves represented and were reminded that they were a despised group.

Kept people hiding themselves and it kept straight people from knowing gay people and allowed stereotypes to emerge.

MORE TOMORROW, SLEEP NOW

I’m signing off since it’s midnight. I’ll be blogging again tomorrow Day 3.

You can also check out Michael Petrelis’s blog at http://mpetrelis.blogspot.com/2010/01/pugno-sweats-schubert-close-up-day-2.html

And Rick Jacobs’s blog at www.CourageCampaign.org

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

OLD MARRIAGE LAWS- SILLY RABBIT MARRIAGE IS FOR WHITE PEOPLE-

Posted On: 2010-01-12 19:44:45

Second Blog Entry about Nancy Cott's history of marriage discrimation from Prop 8 Trial

OLD MARRIAGE LAWS SILLY RABBIT MARRIAGE IS FOR WHITE PEOPLE

In the continuation of Professor Nancy Cott’s testimony she spoke of how marriage laws discriminated against unpopular minorities, which if you look back at American history that means everyone but straight white males.

Slaves were denied the right to marry. After emancipation, blacks were denied the right to marry whites. Chinese immigrant men were denied the right to marry white women and as the influx of Asians from other countries occurred, new categories of marriage denial based on race and ethnicity were created.

WHITE AMERICAN WOMAN SEEKING ASIAN MAN-THERE GOES YOUR CITIZENSHIP

Marriage, back then, like now, was the way benefits were bestowed upon people. So, if you wanted benefits you had to obey the laws. For example, in 1907, the federal government passed a law taking away the American citizenship of white women who chose to marry Asian men as a deterrent to interracial marriage.

Professor Cott made the point that a German immigrant could marry an American woman and he could get American citizenship, but the Chinese were regarded as “aliens ineligible for citizenship.” She said “An American woman would not only lose her citizenship but could only regain it if he died or divorced and if she applied for naturalization.”

This outrageous ban was not lifted until WW II when American and China became allies.

As we know today, the federal government still handles immigration in marriage, it is one of those 1,138 federal rights denied same-sex couples. Immigrant heterosexual spouses are eligible for citizenship, but gay spouses/partners are not.

PARALLELS FROM RACIAL DISCRIMINATION IN MARRIAGE AND GENDER IN MARRIAGE WITH REGARD TO SAME-SEX COUPLES

Cott says “the most direct parallel is that the race laws restricted individuals from having choices over who they married in a way that designated some groups as less worthy and some marriages as less worthy, and it is part of the same effort” to deny same-sex couples. “Couples who made these choices would have less honor, status and fewer benefits than others.”

THE SUPREME COURT RULES THAT MARRIAGE IS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT

In 1913, Cott said that the US Supreme Court ruled that marriage is a fundamental right. Yet, this important ruling was followed by numerous states passing extremely restrictive anti-miscegenation laws preventing the marriage of whites and people of color. The Virginia one being the most notable where interracial couples were considered criminals.

Cott says that “the question of the constitutionality of these laws could have come before the United States Supreme Court before 1967…but because it was such a hot button issue the Court approached this very cautiously.”

Specifically Professor Cott made reference to a case in 1955 that they could have taken, but instead they waited until 1967 to challenge the Virginia law that was passed in 1924.

You can read Professor Cott’s cross-examination in an earlier Blog. I’m sorry this is a bit out of order, but things are moving fast. Also I apologize for any typos.

My next blog which I expect to post later tonight will be about Professor George Chauncey’s testimony about the history of homosexuality and discrimination.

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

The Spirit of Harvey Milk and the Federal Prop 8 Case

Posted On: 2010-01-12 11:55:39

THE SPIRIT OF HARVEY MILK AT THE PROP 8 TRIAL

It’s hard not to think about the legacy of Harvey Milk when the Prop 8 court case is only a block away from where Harvey made history, changed the world, and was tragically murdered by Dan White.

And Harvey’s spirit seemed to fill the federal court house as well. Lance Black, who wrote the screen play for the Harvey Milk movie spoke at the Sunrise Vigil for marriage equality. Bruce Cohen, producer of the MILK movie, and long-time, LGBT activist and friend of Harvey Milk, Cleve Jones, were present in the court room listening the testimony.

Harvey would be proud to see how far we’ve come and I can’t help thinking that he’s been our guardian angel throughout. The marriage license counter requests and the granting of marriage licenses all took place at San Francisco City Hall and all of the marriage cases have happened within a one-block radius of where Harvey Milk stood on the day he took his last breath. Thank you, Harvey, for giving us hope in life and in the legacy you’ve left.

THE MEDIA ROOM

There was no one protesting outside for, or against, marriage equality when I arrived at the federal building this morning.

In the media room right now there are only about 25 people. Yesterday, almost of all of the seats were filled.

Rick Jacobs, Courage Campaign, is vigorously typing away this morning as are the handful of live bloggers and journalist who, like myself find the media room, a little less stressful.

From the media room we are looking at a screen with three images: the witness stand, the judge, and the counsel. There is also a separate screen where documents, commercials and Proposition 8 Proponents’ positions statements are posted on occasion.

PROCRE8

Proponents of Proposition 8 hold the four following positions:

1. The limit of marriage to a man and a woman is something that has been universal. It has been across history, across customs, and across society.

2. The purpose of the institution of marriage and the cultural purpose of marriage is procreation.

3. Across history and culture, marriage is a fundamental pro-child institution between a man and a woman. Marriage aims to meet the child’s need to be emotionally, morally, practically, and legally affiliated with the woman and the man whose sexual union brought the child into the world.

4. Racial restrictions were never a definition feature of the institution of marriage. <

THERE HAVE BEEN MANY FORMS OF MARRIAGE IN OUR SOCIETY

Harvard Professor Cott testimony for marriage equality

-Civil law has been supreme in redefining and regulating marriage.

-Religion has been in the background of many, most Americans understanding of marriage, rather sacramental or otherwise, ceremonial or otherwise. But these are apart from the validity of marriages.

-Any cleric performing marriage only does so because the state has given them the authority to do that.

-In the original constitution there was a statement that said that no religious disagreements with a particular marriage could invalidate that marriage.

SAME-SEX MARRIAGE AND THE DIVORCE RATE

Boutrous asks Cott if there is any empirical evidence that same sex marriage will increase the divorce rate

Cott-In my home state, Mass, where same-sex couples have been able to legally marry for 5 years, the divorce rate is down not up.

THE TENSION AND THE BINDER ARE THICK

At 9:36 AM the cross-examination of Professor Cott begins.

Attorney for Prop 8, Thompson, passes out a binder that is about 500 pages thick. Then he begins what I would call in my lay opinion, badgering the witness. I’m sure my wife, the attorney, would correct me.

It starts like this.

Thompson-“So, you are not an expert of the history of marriage outside of the US.”

Cott-“Not according to my own high standards no.”

Thompson asks her to read something from the jumbo binder.

Cott-“I need my reading glasses for this.”

Thompson fires question after question to discredit the witness.

-Are you familiar with marriage in the most populated places in the world China and India?

-You are not an expert on marriage in ancient Greece, correct?

-You see yourself as someone between a neutral party and advocate, correct?

Cott- “I see myself as someone who comes to the position in support of marriage for same-sex couples because of my historical research.”

You’ve filed briefs in support of gay marriage in New York, Iowa, and New Jersey, correct?

Cott-historians briefs, yes. I volunteered my time bc I believe it’s important for historians to participate in public policy decisions.

9:50 AM Thompson begins making the case that because Cott supported an organization called Alternatives to Marriage, started by a heterosexual couple to validate cohabitation as a valid choice, that this implies she is also a proponent of poly-amorous relationships.

Cott –“I don’t support poly-amorous marriages.”

The tension is thick. Cott is clearly annoyed by Thompson who is firing off question after question with smug intent to make her look stupid.

Thompson- “New York has never had a ban on interracial marriage, correct?”

Cott, annoyed, “Frankly I don’t know this colony by colony.”

Thompson-“So you have no idea that the majority of the states during the founding of the country had no laws against interracial marriage, correct?”

Cott-“That is an irrelevant question.”

Thompson asks her a question about another country.

Judge Walker interrupts reminding Thompson that he’s established that she’s not an expert on marriage outside of the US.

10:15 AM Cott requests a break. Honestly, listening to this attorney asks question is getting on my nerves too. Happy for a break.

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

Prosserga@gmail.com says:

Thanks for the inside the courtroom view!

Posted on: 2010-01-12

gspieler@gmail.com says:

Davina: Thank you so much for blogging on this trial. The mainstream press is not giving us as clear a picture as you have here. It isn't that the newspapers are not covering it or telling the story. The papers don't have the space, and the knowledge, you and Molly have. Must be exhausting, but please know that I and many of my friends, are reading you daily. Best, Geri

Posted on: 2010-01-12

RussellMurawski@wildblue.net says:

"What influence, in fact, have ecclesiastical establishments had on society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual tyranny on the ruins of the civil authority; on many instances they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny; in no instance have they been the guardians of the liberties of the people. Rulers who wish to subvert the public liberty may have found an established clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government, instituted to secure and perpetuate it, needs them not." James Madison (It was the only thing that came to us) Robert n Russell

Posted on: 2010-01-12

Prop 8 Trial-Summary of Day 1

Posted On: 2010-01-11 21:40:56

I woke up this morning at 4:30AM to support my bride, Molly McKay, in her dream of a 6:30 AM Vigil for Marriage Equality outside the federal building. I have to say while I was cranky and a bit resistant, when I saw that there were already dozens of people before 6:00 AM I was delighted. And when we were surrounded by at least 200 advocates of equality only 30 minutes later I was inspired.

A vigil, I was reminded, is a gathering together to watch, to be awake, to be aware and today’s rally was different. It was refreshingly soft. Hope was palpable and it was a collaborative coming together of our diverse LGBT community with our devoted straight allies. There were only 3 anti-gay protestors. That helped too.

I was stationed for eight hours in the media overflow room, the only place to watch the court proceedings if you didn’t have a media pass to the court room.

The trial started with the announcement that there was a stay on youtube videostreaming the trial until Wednesday at 4:00 PM, which is why I can’t feel the fingers on my right hand. I wanted to keep my peeps who had to work aware of what was happening.

“Even convicted murders and child abusers in California enjoy the freedom to marry.”

Ted Olson, a conservative Republican who sincerely gets that marriage equality is a civil rights issue, made his opening remarks about why he believes Prop 8 is unconstitutional.

“This case is about marriage and equality. Plaintiffs are being denied the right to marry under the law.”

“The right to marriage is one of the most vital personal rights”.

“Marriage is a basic civil right.”

“Marriage is the most important relationship in life and of fundamental importance of all individuals.”

See 90 Minutes into the Prop 8 Proceedings Blog to read more of his arguments for marriage equality for same-sex couples at www.davinakotulski.com/blog.php.

Olson said that opponents of Proposition 8 will argue these three points:

1. Marriage is vitally important in American Society.

2. Denying same-sex Prop 8 causes grievous harm against gay and lesbian individuals and adds another chapter of discrimination and suffering.

3. Prop 8 perpetrates immeasurable harm for no good reason.

Tell ‘em You Believe in Biblical Marriage

Attorney Charles Cooper took the floor and began making opening arguments for supporters of Prop 8. That’s when the giggling started. Cooper especially tickled the funny bones in the overflow room when he stated that same-sex marriage would lead to group marriage because bisexuals would be allowed to simultaneously marry one man and one woman of their choosing.

Not sure how this at all logical and it’s definitely not what we’ve seen in the Netherlands which has had same-sex marriage for close to a decade. Or in Massachusetts, where same-sex couples, not triads, have been tying the knot for close to 6 years. It’s certainly not the case in South Africa, Spain, Belgium, Canada or Norway where same-sex couples have equal access to civil marriage.

But why tell the truth when you can make stuff up that scares the hell out of less informed people who believe what they are told in church. More about that later.

He also stated that same-sex marriage harms heterosexual marriage and increases the divorce rate. Umm, google Massachusetts and divorce rate and you’ll find that the first state to allow same-sex couples to marry has the LOWEST divorce rate in the country. But again, why use facts when scare tactics are so much more effective and motivating your base.

Cooper asked “Will this institution remain a pro-child institution or will it be a private relationship that provides couples with personal fulfillment, companionship, and expressions of love?”

Why not all of the above? Marriage should be about personal fulfillment, companionship, and expressions of love. What a wonderful environment for adults who choose to bring children into these loving families.

No on 8 first witness

David Boies calls Jeff Zarrillo to the witness stand.

“Marriage is the reason we are here today.” He says.

Boies asks him, “Do you believe one’s capacity to love and be committed to another individual will grow and expand because of marriage.”

“I would be able to partake in family gatherings, friends’ and work functions as a married individual and have the pride of being able to be married. When someone is married, whether it’s an introduction to a stranger, or someone noticing my ring, it says these individuals are serious, they are committed to another, they have taken that step to be in a relationship that one hopes last the rest of their lives.

The witness is asked if he and his partner have considered having children?

“Paul and I believe it is important to be married first. It will afford us protections for our child.”

Why have you not registered as domestic partners? Boies asks.

“Domestic partnership would relegate me to second-class citizenship. It does not give us due respect.”

Jeff says “Discrimination, whether directly or indirectly is pervasive, especially after Prop 8. Prop 8 has emboldened other states to take these kinds of actions. You can’t turn on the TV, read a blog, or open a newspaper without seeing something about this issue. There are daily reminders of what I can’t have.”

Then they showed us several Yes on 8 videos, but not without protest.

It was not disclosed on the exhibit list Prop 8 supporters argued.

Boies interjects. "Exhibit 99, the one we played was disclosed."

But exhbit 401, the one they wanted to show next, they did not have prior notification for.

“401 is from the campaign featuring Ron Prentiss. We want to play it." Boies urges, stating that it’s not a secret it was used in the campaign.

Defenders of Prop 8 say they are "surprised" by Boies wanting to show this and ask that it not be played bc it causes prejudice.

But Judge Walker says show it.

Turns out Exhbit 401 was a 5-10 minute long video shown in churches aimed at Christians to get them to vote to take away the marriage rights of same-sex couples. It said things like “Christians are walking in fear. If someone says they believe in gay marriage say you believe in Biblical marriage. Stand up like Jesus Christ. Go to the polls and vote yes on Prop 8.”

Next they want to show Exhibit 350-The Gathering Storm Video, but there appears to be a question of it's relevance. The Yes on 8ers don't want it shown because it was produced after the Prop 8 campaign.

Here's the link if you haven't seen it yet. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wp76ly2_NoI

They also showed these ads as evidence of discrimination showing that the "protect our children" message of prop 8 unfairly stigmatizes and hurts gay people.

Gay marriage has everything to do with schools http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7352ZVMKBQM

It’s already happened!

Paul Katami is called to the stand.

During the cross examination the defense attorney for Prop 8 talks about the progressive school in San Francisco where PARENTS, not teachers, organized a field trip to take THEIR children and any child with parental permission to see their school teacher get married at San Francisco City Hall. It was a parent-approved, parent organized outing. Not the school, not the teacher.

The Yes on 8 side used this parent-approved outing to say “See, it’s already happened in California, first graders are being taught about gay marriage in school.”

Yes, because their parents wanted them to learn about it and it was a private, not a public school. I know, because one of my friends was one of the parents that organized the event. She feels sick that they twisted this to strike fear into the hearts of other parents who didn’t have all the facts.

It’s Already happened Yes on 8 Ad http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0PgjcgqFYP4&feature=related

I’m a 45 y.o. woman and I don’t have a word to describe my relationship.

Kristen Perry is called to the stand. Go to blog entitled “I’m a 45 y.o. woman and I don’t have a word to describe my relationship” for a transcription summary of Perry’s testimony. http://www.davinakotulski.com/blog.php

I’m a plaintiff in this case because I want to marry the woman that I love and right now we can’t get married.

Sandy Stier, 47 y.o. plaintiff and fiancé of Kristin Perry, grew up on a farm in south Iowa.

“Our family is a blended family. We each bring two biological children to our family.I’m a plaintiff in this case because I want to marry the woman that I love and right now we can’t get married.”

“Marriage is about making a public commitment to the world, to your wife, to our friends and our family. To me, it’s the way we tell them and each other that this is a lifetime commitment. It’s so different from domestic partnership.”

Last witness for the day is called to the stand, Professor Nancy Cott, Historian Harvard University. Published 8 books including --Public Vows.

Cott begins to lay the foundation for how important marriage is to all people in society and emphasizes that marriage is an important social rite of passage, a fundamental civil right, and that in opposition to what the Yes on 8ers are saying, there is no one definition of marriage throughout history or across cultures.

I will end this blog with a quote from Professor Cott.

“In our folk tales, songs, at least since the rise of the novel, marriage has been the happy ending to the romance, the principle happy ending. That kind of culture polish on marriage on the past century has been forwarded by visual imagery, the rice, the white dress, the happy couple parading down the aisle as a destination to be gained by a couple who loved one another.”

See you tomorrow on facebook and twitter. You can also find blog posts and photos at:

Davina Kotulski.com

Bilerico.com

Unitethefight.org

Marriageequality.org

Liberty, justice, and marriage equality for all!

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

I’m a 45 y.o. woman and I don’t have a word to describe my relationship.

Posted On: 2010-01-11 16:12:41

Boies calls Kristen Perry to the stand. Describe your sexual orientation.

Perry-"I am a lesbian." Boies-"What does that mean?"

"I've only ever fallen in love with women. The happiest I've ever felt is with Sandy because I'm in love with her."

Boies-"Do you think you'll change."

Perry-"I'm 45 years old. I don't think so. I never let myself want (marriage) until now because everyone tells you you're never going to have it."

We went to City Hall and brought all of the boys and my mom and we got married at City Hall. The feelings I had were new to me. I have not let myself want to feel them, floating above the ceremony oh that’s me getting married. I couldn’t believe it. After, we had another ceremony with other people. We planned an afternoon with our friends and family in Berkeley… 100 guests in August 2004.

A few weeks after our August ceremony the California State Supreme Court ruled that our marriages were invalidated.

When you’re gay you think you don’t deserve things. So, I kind of expected it. The City of SF sent us a letter telling us that our marriage was not valid. That’s when we knew we were not married in SF anymore.

Boies-“What did that evoke?”

Perry-“I’m not good enough to be married.”

Boies-“What did you feel when the California Court ruled in 2008?”

Perry-“I was elated. But we couldn’t bring ourselves to do it again right then. We hadn’t really recovered from what happened in 2004. We decided not to go forward at that time.”

They discuss Yes on Prop 8 Ad

Perry- “The ad was to create a set of fear in me and that if I want to fix a bad thing I should vote Yes on 8.”

I'm a 45 y.o. woman and I don't have the word to describe my relationship. It appears to be really important to people and I'd like to use the word too. It symbolizes the most important adult decision you make in your life. You choose that relationship.

They get to support our family in a way that makes sense to them. Because right now we are outside the tradition.

Boies “I’m sure you heard the argument that -Allowing you to get married will damage the institution of marriage.”

“There is something so humiliating about everyone knowing that you want to make that decision (to marry) and knowing that you can’t. I still have to find a way to feel okay and not let every discriminatory behavior toward me personally.”

Nicely done Kristen!!!

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

cali_activist@yahoo.com says:

What an amazing strong woman!! :)

Posted on: 2010-01-11

The giggling has begun!

Posted On: 2010-01-11 12:21:03

As soon as the Yes on 8 attorney took the floor and began speaking out against marriage equality for same-sex couples, the giggles in the media overflow room started.

“Marriage is for a child whose mom and dad had a sexual union. Marriage is to take men and women’s procreation and to “channel it into an enduring union.”

Walker asked. How does same-sex marriage diminish procreation for heterosexual couples?

“Well, will this institution remain a pro-child institution or will it be a private relationship that provides couples with personal fulfillment, companionship, and expressions of love?”

I prefer the later. Marriage should be about personal fulfillment, companionship, and expressions of love what a wonderful environment for adults who them choose to bring children into this world into these kinds of self-actualized, loving families.

They lie. They say gay marriage will lower the marriage rate and increase the divorce rate. I remind that Massachusetts which has had same-sex marriage for 6 years reportedly has the lowest divorce rate.

Time for Obama to come out in support of marriage equality.

Prop 8 supporters used a quote of President Obama’s support of civil unions and statement against gay marriage to justify Prop 8.

Judge Walker commented that President Obama also said that if his parents wouldn’t be able to marry under anti-miscegenation laws.

Equality California is calling on people to contact Obama and ask him to come out against Prop 8.

Go to http://eqca.org and sign the petition.

“Marriage is the sexual embodiment of the man and the woman who form the union. The sexual embodiment forms the institution. Only naturally procreated contact will bring forward life. It’s best when the child is brought into the world that the parents are together.”

Earlier in the proceedings, Ted Olson stated that “The quality of a parent is not measured by gender it is measured by the content of the heart.”

Gay marriage leads to group marriage?

Yes, the Yes on 8 attorney proposed that if same-sex marriage was legal, bisexuals will want to “have the right to express their love and achieve personal fulfillment by the state.”

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

info@unitethefight.org says:

Giggling indeed. These statements are ridiculous and ignores thousands of years of history. Just as Prop 8 proponents claim history is on their side, it's on ours as well. We have existed for thousands of years, and guess what? The world is NOT facing a population emergency. In fact, we're overpopulating. And we have been in relationships for all those thousands of years. And guess what? Marriage still exists! Don't get me started!

Posted on: 2010-01-11

90 Minutes into the Prop 8 Proceedings

Posted On: 2010-01-11 11:55:48

The Prop 8 trial started with introductions from all the attorneys and discussion of the stay of live feed of the trial to other federal court houses and streaming for youtube. A stay has been issued until Wednesday at 4:00 PM. The only place to watch the proceedings is an overflow room in the Federal Building in San Francisco.

Judge Walker reported that he received 138,542 requests for TV coverage of the trial and only 32 requests opposing televised coverage.

Ted Olson, the attorney challenging Prop 8, spoke for the first hour.

He stated “This case is about marriage and equality. Plaintiffs are being denied the right to marry and under the law.”

“The right to marriage is one the most vital personal rights”.

“A basic civil right.”

“A constitution right to privacy, association, intimacy and choice…a spiritual and public commitment.”

“Marriage is the most important relationship

in life and of fundamental importance of all individuals.” “Marriage is central to psychological, emotional, and physical health. Marriage is the building block of family, neighborhood, and community in our society.”

“Gays and lesbians have been classified as degenerates, targeted by police... fired from govt jobs, arrested for private sexual conduct, and stripped of their rights by popular vote.”

"Domestic partners say that gay people are different, separate and unworthy."

“The roots of discrimination run deep... Prop 8 singles out gays alone…even convicted murders and child abusers in California enjoy the freedom to marry.

Olson said that opponents of Proposition 8 will argue these three points:

1. Marriage is vitally important in American Society. 2. Denying same-sex Prop 8 causes grievous harm against gay and lesbian individuals and adds another chapter of discrimination and suffering, 3. Prop 8 perpetrates immeasurable harm for no good reason

Opponents “want that state to be separate and denied to same-sex couples and it’s a judgment being made and this is separate and unequal.”

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

All Rise For Equality

Posted On: 2010-01-11 10:10:27

My hands are still numb from standing in the cold this morning outside the federal building in San Francisco. Marriage Equality USA sponsored a vigil for marriage equality, hope, and justice. There were over 200 participants holding candles to light the early morning rally attended by numerous clergy from many different denominations, including a former Catholic nun and non-PFLAG Mom, Helen Laird. Helen stood with her son and Tim and spoke of why she believed that all of her children had the right to marry. She said her son Tim was legally married prior to Prop 8, but that the family is waiting to celebrate until marriage equality is again the law of the land in California.

Ksuzanne and her wife, both African-American activists for marriage equality spoke of the importance of being representatives for the Black Gay community and spoke of how being able to legally marry granted them the right to hospital visitation, a right KSuzanne unfortunately had to exercise post-Prop 8 when her wife was hospitalized for a life-threatening condition.

Frank and Joe Alfano-Capley spoke of finally being recognized as a legally married couple by the Elevators Union so that Joe can finally get health insurance. While the crowd cheered this wonderful breakthrough, Frank and Joe said it saddened them that the union will not recognize domestic partners and thus another couple with a small child who were unable to marry during the small window when it was legal are still being denied health and other employment related benefits only provided married couples.

Overall the mood of the vigil was positive. Molly McKay, my wonderful wife, spoke of how last year’s garbage has turned to rich compost, an unusual, but accurate metaphor of the outpouring of support for marriage and renewed hope that comes with this new challenge to marriage discrimination. Rev. Roland Stringfellow offer a beautiful evocation for equality and love. There were inspiring performances by Veronica Klaus who sang “I can see clearly now the rain is gone,” and “Here comes the sun.” Melanie Demore, performed “Somewhere over the rainbow” and the civil rights song “Ain’t gonna let nobody turn me around.”

So, now I wait patiently for the trial to start any minute now. Word is that the cameras will not be allowed into the courtroom until after Wednesday. No youtube today.

Stay tuned!

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

Some day this is going to make a really awesome Hollywood movie!

Posted On: 2010-01-10 19:33:34

This weekend has been insane. No, I’m serious, I haven’t felt this overwhelmed since 2004. In fact, I almost wished someone a Happy 2004 today in an e-mail. I guess because preparing for this trial is reminiscent of so many other marriage equality moments, but especially that watershed one in February 2004.

Asking for a marriage license, followed by a huge rally in Sacramento, followed by a bus trip across Northern California. And then, year after year of getting up early to get in line to watch case after case, as the attorneys argued for our equality and debated the merits of allowing us to take part in one of the most notable adult rites of passage.

Anyway, it is déjà vu all over again, except this time we’re going to Nationals if you will, as our cause advances to the federal courts.

Some day this is going to make a really awesome Hollywood movie!

It will start somewhere with a trickle of couples asking for marriage licenses and being turned away, followed by a heroic young politician who puts his political aspirations aside to do the right thing and change the course of history. He is then supported by a team of incredible public servants, city attorneys and LGBT attorneys who decide to take the cause of marriage equality to the courts. They lose the first round and all the marriage licenses are invalidated. But they don’t give up, the activists and the attorneys will not rest and they move forward with a new case.

After four long years same-sex couples are finally granted the legal right to marry. Summer is ushered in with 18,000 long overdue “I dos.” But the wedding music is silenced on November 4, 2008 with the passage of Prop 8.

Our heroes are devastated. There is dissension, depression, and even some property destruction. Our heroes lick their wounds, grieve their losses, and hope for some sort of redemption in the form of a California State Supreme Court ruling saying that Prop 8 was a revision, not an amendment, to the Constitution. But there is no redemption. Prop 8 is upheld.

Then, from out of left, or in this case, right field, an unlikely ally shows up on the scene. Ted Olson, a conservative, Republican attorney, who has teamed up with David Bois, the attorney who went toe to toe with in Bush V. Gore. Who would have thunk it? Opposing counsel playing on the same team? A Conservative, Republican Attorney signing up to defend the gay underdog? No way, I’ve gotta see how this turns out.

And tomorrow the saga continues. Someday this will be an amazing Hollywood movie, filled with tears of joy and tears of defeat. But, I hope it will have a sweet Hollywood ending where boy gets to marry boy, and girl gets to marry girl. Hold on to your seat and make sure you have plenty of popcorn we’re in a for a long one.

Blogging tomorrow from the federal court house.

Yours truly,

Davina Kotulski, Ph.D. Author of Why You Should Give A Damn About Gay Marriage (2004) and the soon to be released- Love Warriors: The Rise of the Marriage Equality Movement and Why It Will Prevail (2010)

http://www.davinakotulski.com

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

No H8--We must be the love and equality we want to see.

Posted On: 2010-01-09 16:50:32

No H8 has been the message of the pro-marriage equality side in response to the passage of Proposition 8, a California voter initiative that took away same-sex couples right to marry. Makes sense right? Those people who are denying us equal rights, literally ripping the veil off of us as we’re exercising our right to marry are haters, plain and simple, big bad bigots. I mean Maggie Gallagher of NOM, who I debated at Brown University in 2006, is like the Grinch who stole marriage and Brian Brown of NOM reminds me of an evil frat boy like the ones who tried to run me over with their pick-up trucks in high school. And because they are haters succeeding at taking away our rights in many states it’s easy for me to be pissed off at them at H8 them, right? But wait, that contradicts the message of no H8.

During the California State Supreme Court Case challenge to Prop 8 in March 2009, I stood on the steps of the State Supreme Court House and was yelled at by Yes on 8 people holding anti-gay signs. One woman was literally screaming in my face and pointing her finger at me. You can see the back of my head here in the photo on this page:

Prop. 8 debates flare at Civic Center viewing

Her adult daughter was with her. You can see they are holding a sign of a gay couple kissing with a red circle and a slash through it.

Usually, my hands would have trembled with rage in the face of people calling me names and screaming anti-gay epithets, but something powerful took hold of my heart and I was filled with compassion. Yep, compassion. The kind of compassion that Ghandi writes about. I truly felt love for my “enemies” I felt myself sending them love. And I began to mouth the words “It’s okay. I love you.” The young woman had to close her eyes. She could not meet my eyes that were committed to respecting her dignity and worth and refused to respond to her with anything less than love. I could feel her pain, or as we psychologists say, her cognitive dissonance.

I had a shocking personal breakthrough feeling energized with the spirit of love, smiling and singing “What the world needs now is love sweet love, it’s the only thing that there’s just too little of.” We sang that line over and over and over again for at least 30 minutes. It was a healing shield from what was being hurled at us and kept my heart connected to why I was there, because of love. Because I know my ability to love is equal to a heterosexual person’s ability to love and that my love for another women should be honored and cherished and respected the way the love between a man and a woman is.

I grasped the other marriage equality supporters and we held on to each other’s shoulders and stood strong being the truth of who we are-lights of love, equality, justice and joy! You can’t take that away from us, only we can put out that light. We will continue to emerge as love warriors dedicated to love and equality for all. And because we are a movement of love and equality, seeking liberty, justice, dignity, and respect for all, we must embody those qualities in all of our interactions with those who fear marriage equality and cannot yet see that the world becomes a better place when the bonds of unjust tradition are broken, society’s emotional IQ, our emotional quotient, rises when all are equal and discrimination is eradicated, and freedom from tyranny means a stronger, happier and healthier society for all.

It’s kind of like the anti-gay side is like the Taliban, fearing change, fearing loss of power, and we are like the women seeking the right to equal treatment and opportunity. They fear the collapse of their power and being on equal footing with a minority they’ve been able to silence into submission.

But, as we move forward, claiming our equality, we must not become the bullies. We must not stoop to name calling or property damage or violence. We must hold ourselves in grace and dignity, with compassion for their choices knowing that many of them will one day awaken to their mistakes. Some will even apologize and may even become our allies as so many already have.

Davina Kotulski, Ph.D. Author of Why You Should Give A Damn About Gay Marriage (2004) and the soon to be released- Love Warriors: The Rise of the Marriage Equality Movement and Why It Will Prevail (2010)

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

healingheartart@pacific.net says:

I appriciate these words.. I know I am not to the love point yet.. I try to speak it, am there philosphically.. and even try to act on it.. I generally dont yell at those who oppose marriage equality. I often walk over the groups and tell them that I am greatful to live in place that gives us both the right to be there. I respect those who get to the point who truly get to the point of exchanging love. one of my mottos is... 'may I give them the grace that I hope others will give me when I need it'. thanks Davina

Posted on: 2010-01-09

Wait, stop the trial! 1-8-10 By Davina Kotulski, Ph.D. Author of Why You Should Give A Damn About Gay Marriage

Posted On: 2010-01-08 00:00:00

While Perry v Schwarzenegger, is scheduled to begin on Monday January 11, 2010 at 8:30am in Courtroom 6 on the 17th floor of the Phillip Burton Federal Building at 450 Golden Gate Ave. in San Francisco, anti-marriage equality forces are seeking to postpone the trial hoping to overturn Judge Walker's decision to televise the trial.

Anti-equality forces, such as Maggie Gallagher of NOM, are outraged by Walker's decision and are calling the trial "a show trial in kangaroo court." Gallagher, once again tries to cry victim, saying that Walker's "extraordinary bias has already been flagrantly on display."

I say let the people learn about our systems of checks and balances and how our court systems and political process work. I think this is a brilliant opportunity for people to learn about our constitution and how anti-gay opponents use church doctrine and the power of church networks to turn our country into a theocracy, rather than the democracy our Founding Fathers intended it to be.

We are hopeful that the trial will go on as planned and Marriage Equality USA is hosting a Sunrise Equality Vigil at 6:30AM on January 11th. There will be music and spoken inspiration from advocates of equality. For more information go to Marriage Equality USA

I am planning to attend most of the court proceedings and will blog about my experience daily at http://www.davinakotulski.com/blog.php

Borrowing from Brian Brown of NOM with a few modifications in all CAPS.

Dear friend and comrade, I pray for you and for all those who stand for marriage EQUALITY! God Bless you!

Faithfully,

Davina Kotulski-Why You Should Give A Damn About Gay Marriage

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

rlussier@lenscraft.com says:

Brian & Maggie are clearly working for Satan. Who else but the Great Deceiver would try to teach people that Jesus' message was anti-love? I have prayed long for the Lord to show them the light, but I fear their souls are already lost to the eternal flames.

Posted on: 2010-01-09

sidneytrifkin@gmail.com says:

I'm so excited that you'll be blogging about the the trial every day. I'm looking forward to every post!

Posted on: 2010-01-08

Let Justice Be Visible by Davina Kotulski,Ph.D. Author of Why You Should Give A Damn About Gay Marriage 1-7-10

Posted On: 2010-01-07 00:00:00

The federal trial challenging the constitutionality of Proposition 8 that denies same-sex couples the right to marry does not begin until Monday, but the two sides are already involved in heated debate and it’s not even over same-sex marriage. Yesterday, Judge Vaughn Walker was ruling on whether or not the trial should be televised.

The anti-gay Yes on 8 people are adamant that they do not want cameras in the court room because they don’t want people to know who their witnesses are and what they have done claiming fear of reprisal. I would suggest that they fear people actually knowing how dirty they played to win the election.

The marriage equality side however, does want cameras in the court room, because they believe that everyone should have the opportunity to witness the debate and that the justice process should not be sequestered away behind closed doors, but in the light, transparent for all to see.

This debate is no less fiery than the question of allowing same-sex couples to marry and generated 82,103 requests within 24 hours from the marriage equality side to Judge Vaughn Walker to let justice be visible.

Judge Walker agreed to allow cameras in the court room, and if not appealed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, the marriage equality trial will be recorded and televised on youtube either at the end of each day once the court is no longer in session or at a later time.

The Courage Campaign is still seeking 100,000 signatures of support before the deadline Friday January 8th at noon.

If you’d like to add your name go to: http://www.couragecampaign.org/TeleviseTheTrial

The actual trial, Perry v Schwarzenegger, is scheduled to begin on Monday January 11, 2010 at 8:30am in Courtroom 6 on the 17th floor of the Phillip Burton Federal Building at 450 Golden Gate Ave. in SF. There will be very limited seating available in the courtroom.

Marriage Equality USA is hosting a Sunrise Equality Vigil at 6:30AM on January 11th. There will be music and spoken inspiration from advocates of equality. For more information go to (http://www.marriageequality.org).

To ensure that the community has easy access to the important highlights and pivotal witness testimony in this historic case that directly and profoundly impacts all LGBT Americans, I have decided to attend most of the court proceedings and will be blogging about my experience daily. I will be attending most of the court proceedings and will be blogging about my experience. Please check my website http://www.davinakotulski.com/blog.php

for more information. You can also contact Molly McKay, Media Director, Marriage Equality USA at media@marriageequality.org.

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

The NY Senate has postponed the vote for marriage equality.

Posted On: 2009-11-10 00:00:00

The NY Senate has postponed the vote for marriage equality. We still need the support of several Democratic Senators. I urge you to contact your friends and family in NY and ask them to contact these Senators to support marriage equality.

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

Marriage Equality Denied in Maine 11/3/09

Posted On: 2009-11-04 00:00:00

Big time bummer!

31 states have now passed laws to deny same-sex couples the legal right to marry.

It saddens me that approxomately 53% Americans continue to deny same-sex couples equality, but, it deeply troubles me that this country allows a majority to vote on the constitutional rights of a minority.

Civil rights should never be a popularity contest and if they had been, interracial marriage would not have been legal until 1997 when a majority of Americans finally approved of them. Love is good for the world and loving couples who want to be able to care for one another need to have equal access to family rights. Same-sex love is beautiful, romantic and sexy. It should be honored and cherished like any other boy meets girl love story. I know someday this inequality, this wrong will be righted.

I invite you to share your support for marriage equality with at least 5 people tomorrow. Post it on your facebook, talk to the person in line while you get your coffee, wear a sticker, or send out an e-mail. Let the voice of equality be heard.

Thanks for all your positive e-mails to yesterday's post and thank you so much for your support! Your words truly touch and sustain me.

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

Marriage equality is a global human rights issue!

Posted On: 2009-09-07 00:00:00

Exciting things are happening on Planet Earth for Marriage Equality.

Marriage equality advocates across the globe are speaking out against “separate and unequal” treatment for same-sex couples. Equal Love Australia held a rally last month for full marriage equality. Same-sex couples can access civil unions, but Equal Love Australia knows that civil unions=second-class citizenship. Check out their websites for some fantastic marriage equality commercials. www.equallove.info

Marriage Equality Ireland is also advocating for the extension of full marriage rights, and not limited partnerships. Borrowing from MTV’s “Permission” Video they created a “Sinead’s Hand” video in support of marriage equality. It’s a great video! http://www.marriagequality.ie/action/sineadshand/

In Italy, same-sex couples filed a lawsuit in Venice noting that the laws were gender neutral. While many Italian cities have domestic partner type registries, the country itself offers no recognition to same-sex couples.

Stay tuned, a handful of other countries are about to upgrade to marriage.

Coming Up:

Please join us on October 11 for Marriage Equality Bridge Marches in San Diego and San Francisco or the Equality Across American march in Washington, DC.

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

Letter to the Editor to East Bay Express About the Father of Prop 8

Posted On: 2009-08-17 00:00:00

I was deeply disturbed to read about Bishop Sal’s (Salvatore Cordilieone) integral role in the Yes on 8 Campaign. How can a man of the church work to raise $40 million dollars to away rights from people? How many migrant workers could have been fed with that $40 million dollars? How many job skills programs, ESL programs, health and wellness programs could have been funded with the money that was used to strip gay families of legal protections and dignity?

A man who works to take away people’s rights, rather than uplift them and alleviate suffering is not a man to be trusted, nor revered. There’s nothing holy about his union with the Yes on 8 Campaign.

The fact that he invited Maggie Gallagher who advocates the benefits of marriage, but wishes to deny those benefits to same-sex couples is egregious. I debated Maggie Gallagher at Brown University in Rhode Island in September 2006 and her arguments were disingenuous. The educated students saw through her insincerity when I invited her to explore our common ground in support of helping people save their marriages. In addition to a marriage equality advocate, I am also a psychologist and have taught marriage and family therapy to graduate level counseling students for over a decade. Not surprising, she declined. Because her real interest was taking away rights from gay people, not supporting people, gay or straight, to have strong healthy relationships. How many free couples’ communication workshops could have been offered with that $40 million dollars? How many conflict resolution classes to reduce family violence could have been offered? Maggie Gallagher was more concerned with the reduction of white babies being born in Scandinavian countries, showing her other real agenda, white supremacy.

But in the face of her disingenuousness and her inability to convince the Brown Students that they should be anti-gay marriage, she didn’t give up. And these folks don’t. They go back to their liar and mastermind another diabolical scheme to take away gay people’s and women’s rights. They cannot be underestimated. They are not just those kooky, religious people. They are formidable opponents with sinister agendas. I mean Bishop Sal was trying to deny communion to Catholic women who use birth control or have their man use a condom. Women, guess what Bishop Sal will be working on next? Shaming you and taking away your rights!

What kind of religious leader do you want to follow, one who helps, heals and uplifts people or one who is committed to tearing down the human soul? Gallagher, Bishop Sal, and others like them have made it their life’s work to take away LGBT people’s rights.

Bishop Sal, I pray that you will stop misusing your power. I pray that you will have a change of heart and use your position and influence to help people like Jesus did. I also invite my Catholic friends and colleagues to examine carefully your investment in the Catholic Church. See where you tidings are going? Wouldn’t you feel better knowing your church is using your money to feed, clothe, shelter, and educate people in need rather than being used to take away your gay friend’s, family member’s and colleagues’ equality?

Davina Kotulski, Ph.D.

Psychologist, Author of Why You Should Give A Damn About Gay Marriage

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

Juneteenth and Obama’s Historic Step for LGBT rights (6-18-09)

Posted On: 2009-06-18 00:00:00

Juneteenth and Obama’s Historic Step for LGBT rights

Yesterday, I was angry. I was disappointed. The man I voted for, our beloved President Obama, signed a memo “granting” rights to same-sex and opposite sex domestic partners of federal employees. These rights he “granted” already existed under the Clinton Administration, but become obscured under Bush (pun intended). In fact, when I worked for the federal government I had a copy of the Family Friendly Medical Leave Act signed by Clinton in 1993, in case I ever had a supervisor try to deny me access to family leave to care for my same-sex partner. It only came up once, thank God, when Molly had foot surgery and I needed to take time off to care for her. I have to confess that even with that paperwork in my desk drawer, I didn’t know if I would be challenged as many of my co-workers in lesser “enlightened” departments, as John Berry, President of the Office of Personal Management for the federal government, were. Several of my co-workers were deemed “AWOL” when they took time off to care for a sick domestic partner.

So what the heck does yesterday’s memo signed by President Obama regarding federal employee’s domestic partnerships signed have to do with Juneteenth AKA Emancipation Day?

Some of you may not even know of about the celebration of Juneteenth which commemorates the announcement of the abolition of slavery to African American slaves in Texas in June 1865. You see one way people are oppressed is by denying them knowledge of their rights. African Americans living in Texas in 1865 did not know that slavery was abolished through the Emancipation Proclamation on January 1, 1863. They were still living as slaves because they didn’t get the “memo,” if you will. Certainly, their evil slave masters were not about to tell them of their liberation and continued to dupe and use the people as their property as they had always done. It wasn’t until almost 18 months later when Gordon Granger, a Union General, arrived in Galvenston, Texas with 2000 federal troops and read “General Order No. 3”:

“The people of Texas are informed that, in accordance with a proclamation from the Executive of the United States, all slaves are free. This involves an absolute equality of personal rights and rights of property between former masters and slaves, and the connection heretofore existing between them becomes that between employer and hired labor. The freedmen are advised to remain quietly at their present homes and work for wages. They are informed that they will not be allowed to collect at military posts and that they will not be supported in idleness either there or elsewhere.” (Source Wikipedia)

Yesterday, President Obama delivered a memo declaring to LGBT federal employees and their supervisors that they have certain rights already and they can start claiming those rights and that supervisors who try to use homophobia or DOMA to deny those rights will no longer be defended by the government and that denial of those rights will be registered by Equal Employment Opportunity Council as discrimination and prosecuted.

I am in no way saying that learning of one’s freedom from slavery is equivalent to knowing that you have a right to take family medical leave, but I am saying the synchronicity here and and the spiritual message and psychological impact of this declaration are a profound first step. In reality, after the African Americans in Texas celebrated their freedom they still had to face the realites of poverty, violent racism, and a new indentured servitude to white landowners for another hundred years, but the tide had turned, which today I can more clearly see is the case for LGBT people under President Obama’s leadership.

So today, I have let go of my anger. I remember and celebrate Juneteenth and the African Americans in Texas learning of their new rights and how that breaking of the physical and psychological chains of bondage are necessary for all of us. In celebrating Juneteenth I see the hands of the generations of peoples before me, who were lifted up, and through this, lifted up the consciousness of all people making it possible for real love to exist between the races and to bring into being our beautiful President, born from the love of a black man and a white woman, who yesterday with his loving hand ensured that LGBT federal employess get that long overdue memo.

So if you’d like to call President Obama and thank him here’s his #202-456-1111. Sending him some positive energy is good too.

With a new perspective,

Dr. Davina Kotulski

Author of Why You Should Give A Damn About Gay Marriage

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

Air Sandwhich Anyone? June 17, 2009

Posted On: 2009-06-17 00:00:00

Today’s historic step for LGBT rights was a step in place. There are forward step’s--we saw some of those in the Clinton Administration, backward steps—we saw some of those in the Clinton Administration and a ton of them in the Bush Administration, and now we are seeing “step in place” or “mark time” as they called it during drill practice for the Disturbance Control Team at FCI-Dublin where I used to work.

Stepping in place is not advancing. Obama did not advance LGBT rights today. He signed a memo reminding agencies that under the Clinton Administration certain rights were available to same-sex partners of federal workers like the right to name a beneficiary for your thrift savings plan and to take leave to care for someone who is like family to you. These rights already existed. True, sometimes supervisors used DOMA and homophobia to deny LGBT federal employees the right to exercise their family medical leave, but these were rights we already have. This was more of a warning to those supervisors that if they deny us our family medical leave the DOJ is not going to protect them when the discrimination lawsuits start streaming in.

Obama did not give federal employee’s same-sex partners access to health insurance or pensions. So, essentially we got an air sandwich with the promise of lunch meat and condiments down the road.

Frankly, this feels like more campaign promises in an effort to regain the trust of major LGBT donors of the Democratic party who just pulled their support when they heard that the DOJ is defending DOMA and comparing same-sex marriages to incestuous marriages and marriages between adults and children. I am deeply offended that my own country, under Democratic leadership would submit legal briefs in support of DOMA, let alone that they would compare my marriage to pedophilia. Derision and discrimination against LGBT Americans must stop. Our leaders must stand up against the injustices committed against us or they are complicit in denying our humanity.

Please contact your Senators and Legislators and ask them to support full equality for LGBT Americans by supporting the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, the repeal of the Denial of Marriage Act, the passage of the Uniting American Families Act and the passage of the Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act.

Thank you,

Davina Kotulski, Ph.D. Author of Why You Should Give A Damn About Gay Marriage

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

6-2-09 A Moment to Reflect

Posted On: 2009-06-02 00:00:00

Thirteen years ago Molly and I went on our first date—the San Jose Gay Rodeo. We drove from the Bay Area to San Jose and had the first date interview. What are your values? Your political party? What things are important to you, nature, family, music, making a difference, helping others, etc. We found that we had much in common and had a great time dancing. In fact, as we left the rodeo dance and wandered into another ballroom in the hotel that was hosting a clean and sober dance and decided to dance a few dances. Despite being the only gay couple in the room, we were warmly accepted. Love is like that, and though we were barely aware of the presence of love, it moved through us and was visible to others.

Truth be told, after that first date, we decided to be just friends and danced together at the country western club. I was in an on-again-off-again relationship that was “on again” after she saw me happy with Molly and Molly still had some wild oats to sow. But as the summer came to a close and I had enough of being yo-yo-ed and Molly was yearning for something deeper, we gave it another shot. It was magic. Love is like that. Black and white turned Technicolor, my heart expanded. The world was our playground, we sat by the river under the stars and over looking the ocean, sang along to our “falling in love” soundtrack, danced in the streets, and dreamed of our future together. We were so in love and people responded. It was infectious. Love is like that too. As we exuded joy, it was a palpable energy that flowed from us and encircled the people around us. I know that sounds crazy, but it was really there. It was a gift.

For over a decade we have worked to equalize the legal recognition of same-sex couples. We have both spoken extensively throughout the country and occasionally in other countries. We have been featured in several documentaries voicing our call to equality across the planet (Venezuela, Italy, France, New Zealand, India, Portugal, Spain, Taiwan and that is just the places I know of). My book has sold over 9,000 copies and I have had the great fortune to hear from people about how the book brought understanding where none existed to heal broken relationships. My eyes water as I write this just being with how powerful that call to love and equality has been.

Thirteen years later, after a spiritual ceremony in 1998, a 6 month marriage uprising in 2004, and a shotgun legal wedding in 2008 where all our wedding gifts were donations to defeat Proposition 8, Molly and I are finally legally married. The California Supreme Court ruled one week ago that our marriage is valid and recognized in the state of California. While this has not be an easy happily-ever-after, it beats Romeo and Juliet’s story.

We are legally married and my heart reminds me that what set this powerful call to equality in motion was the joy of being with my beloved and dancing through life together, stopping to smell the roses, to sit by the river, to sing, to wander, to mingle, to co-exist with others in our personal bliss. My heart reminds me that love ignites the brightest fire; that love is the greatest gift we can give to ourselves and others. And it is love that has the vibration, the energy, the chemistry to transform the world. So I borrow and improvise from the great leader Ghandi and invite us all to remember to be the Love you want to see in the world and know that the rest will follow.

Blessings,

Davina

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

Awaiting California Supreme Court Decision to Repeal Prop 8

Posted On: 2009-05-21 00:00:00

May 21, 2009

It is expected that Tuesday May 26th the California State Supreme Court will rule on the whether or not a group of voters can strip constitutional rights for a minority. I ask you for your thoughts and prayers as we await the courts decision.

If the judges vote to repeal Prop 8 we will celebrate justice with a march from San Francisco City Hall to the Martin Luther King Memorial at the Yerba Buena Center where we will hold a rally mindful that our work will not be done until marriage equality is the law of the land and all of our LGBT brothers and sisters are free to express themselves free from violence and hatred.

If the judges uphold Prop 8 we will shake our heads, then hold them up high, strengthening our resolve and commitment to equal justice under law. We will mark the day with with a rally at San Francisco City Hall and a march to the Martin Luther King Memorial at the Yerba Buena Center where we will hold another rally ever mindful of those who came before us and the youth and children of the future who we are committed to making a better future for. We will prepare ourselves to undo Prop 8 and declare November 2, 2010 the date when justice will be ours.

Below is a list of the events that are happening with regard to the decision in the Bay Area. Visit www.marriageequality.org or dayofdecision.com for information about events throughout the country.

ON THE NIGHT PRIOR TO THE RULING:

- 7:00pm to 8:30pm: Interfaith Prayer service at Grace Cathedral (1100 California St. All peaceful loving people are invited to come together for this service, no matter what their position on the court case may be.

THE DAY OF THE RULING:

- 8:30am to 9:15am: Service/Blessing at St. Francis Lutheran Church (152 Church St, across from Safeway).

- 9:15am to 10am: March from Saint Francis to Civic Center Plaza.

- 10:00am to 10:30: California Supreme Court steps (400 McAllister St [map])

Everyone is invited to stand with us on the steps to receive the ruling. If you are a couple that married, or wanted to marry and will speak to media, please email your name, contact information, phone number and story to media@marriageequality.org Please bring your families and allies with you.

- 10:30am: Circle of Care at Civic Center Plaza. If the marriage ban is upheld, a group of Bay Area clergy and congregants will engage in nonviolent civil disobedience immediately after receiving the ruling go to www.onestruggleonefight.org for details.

THE EVENING OF THE RULING - COMMUNITY GATHERING

Emceed by Stuart Gaffney, John Lewis, Lawrence Ellis, Molly McKay and Davina Kotulski

- 5:00pm to 6:00: Pre-March Rally at SF City Hall (speakers include Terry Stewart, Kate Kendall and others)

- 6:00pm to 7:00: March to MLK Memorial at Yerba Buena Gardens (4th and Mission, next to Metreon [map]). Follow http://twitter.com/stop8dotorg for live updates from the march.

- 7:00pm to 8:30: Post-March Gathering at Yerba Buena Gardens, (speakers including Rev. Amos Brown , music, and next steps)

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

Please sign the Petition Requesting Apology for Abuses at US Indian Schools 5-6-09.

Posted On: 2009-05-06 00:00:00

Dear Friends,

I want to invite you to sign the Petition Requesting Apology for Abuses at US Indian Schools. You may not know, but I worked for many years with incarcerated Native American women and saw first hand the impact of the boarding schools on their lives. Some of my clients had been in boarding schools and were beaten for speaking their language and practicing Native American spiritual practices. One woman had a scar from where she was beaten by a nun, another had flashbacks of being locked in a basement. Other clients had parents who were in boarding schools and their parents grew up rejecting their culture because of the severe abuse they experienced. One of the longest running groups I did in the prison was a Native American women’s talking/healing circle. The group focused on culture pride and healing from intergenerational transmission of trauma and PTSD. It was a great honor to be a part of this group and very painful to hear the stories my clients shared with me about the legacy of the boarding schools.

Apologies are a critical part of healing. The U.S. Government has never apologized to the Native Americans for these abuses. Canada has. The U.S. Government is US. I urge you to sign the petition asking Obama to apologize and let the healing begin. I also urge you to help support the Wellbriety Journey for Forgiveness that beings May 16th at the Chemawa Boarding School in Oregon. You can support the healing journey by going to events close to you or by making a donation. I’m hoping to travel to Warm Springs Reservation on May 17th. This was the reservation near my home and when I was a counselor assistant for a drug and alcohol treatment center back in 1989 we had many teens from the reservation. I encourage you to join me in supporting this effort with your thoughts, prayers, signature, resources and time.

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/Apology-For-Indian-School-Abuses

Thank you! Davina

Wellbriety Journey for Forgiveness – Urgent Funding Appeal Healing the Legacy of the Boarding Schools 1879-2009

On May 16th 2009, White Bison will begin a 40-day, 6800 mile cross-country journey to present and former Indian School sites. The Wellbriety Journey for Forgiveness, a 40-day, 6,800-mile cross-country journey to 23 present and former Indian school sites. It's goal is to promote awareness, dialogue and forgiveness among Native peoples for the historical trauma of the Indian Boarding School Era which began in 1879. Please support the 2009 Wellbriety Journey for Forgiveness and Native American healing now. It will be led by the Sacred Hoop of 100 Eagle Feathers and it will carry the message that historical trauma can be healed - and prevented from being passed on to yet another generation - through a willingness to “forgive the unforgivable.” Daylong workshops are planned at the school sites to share educational information about the schools, encourage open discussion in a facilitated talking circle format and to conduct healing ceremonies involving local tribal elders and mental health professionals to release the unresolved grief that school survivors and/or their descendants may still be carrying from trauma experienced at one of the schools.

An increasing body of evidence shows that intergenerational trauma is connected to suicides, substance abuse, domestic violence, child sexual abuse, family break-ups and diabetes which continue to plague Native American communities today. The Wellbriety Journey for Forgiveness will help begin the healing process in Native communities around the country.

Despite vigorous fund raising efforts, we find ourselves well below the mark that we had hoped to achieve in terms of donations required to complete this journey. Many Native Americans have sent letters and comments sharing first-hand experience in terms of historical trauma and how critically important this journey is to them. Perhaps you have experienced the devastating effects of unresolved grief yourself, or have seen one of your loved ones affected by trauma.

Please take a moment to imagine how your support of at least one mile will assist White Bison in promoting healing and forgiveness among Native Americans across the country. Will you please help by donating $18.79 for one mile? If funding a mile isn’t within your means, even a small donation of $5.00 will help tremendously.

It is not too late to help, if only you act now. Your support of this historic Native American healing journey is greatly appreciated! Please make at least a small contribution and let the healing begin!! Your tax deductible donation can be easily made one of several ways:

 Check or money order payable to: White Bison, Inc. 6145 Lehman Drive, Suite 200 Colorado Springs, CO 80918.

 Call our toll-free number, 877-871-1495 and we will be happy to take your donation over the phone via Mastercard, Visa or American Express.

 Visit our secure website at www.whitebison.org for donation via PayPal

Thank you very much for your consideration of this request.

http://whitebison.org/wellbriety-journey/index.htm

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

Amazon Rankings Have Returned! 4-14-09

Posted On: 2009-04-14 00:00:00

Dear friends,

Thank you for your e-mails to me and Amazon and letting people know about what is now being called a "glitch" at Amazon. I believe the national outrcry about removing the rankings from books with "gay" content has sent a wake up call to Amazon that they need to pay more attention to the books they are labeling "adult themed." I must tell you it was quite a shock to see my ranking removed because it was considered "adult themed" and Henry Miller's Tropic of Cancer was not considered "adult themed." Anyhow, my ranking for Why You Should Give A Damn About Gay Marriage is back and Amazon has apologized and promised to "implement new measures" to keep this from happening again. Please see AP article below.

Thank you again for standing up for LGBT people.

Davina

They're baaaack! Amazon restores sales rankings

Associated Press

By HILLEL ITALIE, AP National Writer Hillel Italie, Ap National Writer – 1 hr 24 mins ago 4-14-09

NEW YORK – The missing sales numbers are coming back on Amazon.com. Two days after Amazon said a "glitch" had caused the sales rank to be dropped from thousands of books, the numbers returned Tuesday for Annie Proulx's "Brokeback Mountain," James Baldwin's "Giovanni's Room" and other notable titles.

Some authors whose rankings were dropped have posted messages from Amazon that said their books had been categorized as "Adult" and were being removed from some best-seller lists and search functions. Amazon's actions led to a furious stream of responses on Twitter and elsewhere online.

Amazon has yet to comment on the author messages, but on Monday called the deletions an "embarrassing and ham-fisted cataloging error" and promised "to implement new measures" to prevent them in the future.

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

Amazon "Gay Glitch" or "Anti-Gay" April 12, 2009

Posted On: 2009-04-12 00:00:00

Dear Friends,

My heart is beating so fast as I share this extremely upsetting news with you. Amazon just stripped the sales ranking indicators for all books with anything that has to do with gay content and they are calling it "adult" material. On 1/3/09, the last time I checked my Amazon book ranking it was91,602. I was horrified when I received an e-mail today telling me about Amazon's new policy and went to the site myself and found my rank missing. I searched other books like Eckhart Tolle's The New Earth and a new favorite The Michaelangelo Method which ranks at #366,419 in Books still have their ranking. Evan Wolfson's Why Marriage Matters has lost his ranking, but Focus on the Family's Glen Stanton's anti-gay Why Marriage Matters book has a rank.

Friends, I am sorry, but my hands are shaking and I am burning in my stomach acids at this RAW INJUSTICE. I'm asking you to boycott Amazon.com until they rectify this egregious act. And please share this with everyone. We cannot allow gay people to be treated this way.

Please read and sign the petition: In protest at Amazon's new "adult" policy

You can view this petition at: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/tell-a-friend/3861493

If you wish to contact Investor Relations at Amazon ir@amazon.com

Thank you,

Davina

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

Fairness: Iowa Style!

Posted On: 2009-03-31 00:00:00

The Inuit have 20 different words for snow, discerning the nuances of thickness and moisture. Iowans have only one word for fairness, but it seems there are levels of fairness that I, for one, never considered. Iowans seem to emulate a richer, deeper meaning for the word fairness. I think of fairness as cutting the sandwich or candy bar down the middle and you get your half and I get mine. Iowans, however, seem to view fairness as a moral issue, something sacred that must be protected. To be honest, the word fairness, never resonated with me that way, the concepts of justice, equality, and freedom, those words spoke to me, but the word fairness always seemed a little beige.

Iowa just before spring is rich in earth tones, a plethora of browns and crèmes, light greens, muted clay colors, chocolate rivers stirred up by flooding and filled with silt. Crop fields resting, the ground still thawing out, not yet ready for planting, a shocking contrast to the bursting colors of California this time of year. I found it grounding. Yes, the earth tones were a part of that, but it was also the salt of the earth characteristics of my hosts, Lynn Fallon and Ed Fallon, (a former Iowa State Representative and Gubernatorial candidate), who welcomed me into their home, introduced me to their chickens, their fellow Iowans, and the culture of Des Moines.

Ed and Lynn have an organization called I’m for Iowa , a partnership committed to civil rights and justice, progressive reform, and environmental protection. (www.IMforIOWA.com) Ed and Lynn, coupled with Phyllis and Marla Stevens of Marriage Equality USA-Central Iowa Chapter , invited and hosted my visit to Des Moines. My mission—to talk about the shortcomings of the “official” Prop 8 campaign and the messaging and strategies that were not utilized in California that can help Iowa prepare for and prevent a constitutional amendment. I was thrilled that my hosts were taking a pro-active stance by inviting me and several other leaders in the marriage equality movement to Iowa to share our collective wisdom and so we could support the great work already happening in Iowa.

My first stop was meeting with One Iowa , the statewide LGBT group, and Iowa Marriage Equality Community Educator from Lambda Legal, Matt Fender. The One Iowa staff (Carolyn Jenison, Brad Clark, Justin Uebelhor, Ryan Crane and others) are working to educate fellow Iowans about the need for equal marriage rights. They have created a moving project called Our Story, a video of same-sex couples, their families, and straight allies, including religious leaders, talking about why marriage equality is important to creating a fair Iowa. The second night I was in town, they had an event in downtown Des Moines at the Ritual Café, where same-sex couples and parents of LGBT kids shared their personal stories and family values of love, acceptance, and equality with their elected officials. The evening was very inspiring and emotional! Hard to hold back tears when straight parents talk about how much they love their gay kids for who they are. You just can’t get enough of that!!!

After my meeting with One Iowa, I had the privilege of meeting with Marriage Equality USA Central Iowa’s Chapter Leader Phyllis Stevens and Sandy Volpalka, Executive Director of the Iowa LGBT Aging Network . We discussed the importance of including grassroots activists and volunteers in public education efforts and official campaigns and enjoyed a delicious pizza. I must add that the food in Des Moines was incredible. While Ed said that downtown Des Moines used to be called Dead Moines after 5:00 PM, it isn’t like that anymore. I found the restaurants and bars hopping and cuisine that rivaled some of the best California cuisine I’ve ever had. And for those of you who are coffee snobs like me, they have espresso and real cafes!

My first evening ended with a public talk and book signing at the Des Moines Library where I was asked a question I have never been asked before about marriage equality. It went something along the lines of “If straight men’s adult magazines are filled with images of two women does that mean it would be a winning strategy?” Okay, that is not exactly how it was asked, but something to that effect. As they say A for effort, but um, it may sell magazines, but not likely marriage equality.

After the library talk, we ambled down to the local billiard bar and shot pool and asked everyone who came over to say “hi”(and it was a lot of people because Ed Fallon knows everyone), what they thought about marriage equality. And that’s where I saw it, in those deep thoughtful eyes of each Iowan as they leaned on the counter and pondered what was being asked of them. “It’s only fair.” “Everyone should be treated equally.” “It’s not my business.” I was so grateful to my hosts, Ed, Lynn, and Phyllis, for their boldness and bravery to start a conversation and find common ground. I was not under any illusion that the people we asked were going to march in the streets with us, but we don’t need that, we just need the right to pursue our happiness and not be thwarted from our liberties. I slept well that night with visions of equality dancing in my head.

The next day I spoke with a diverse group of Iowans working collaboratively for marriage equality. Folks from Planned Parenthood , clergy, professors, a diversity trainer, activists, and Betti Torrier, the Project Coordinator for Faithful Voices , a project of Interfaith Alliance of Iowa and Action Fund . The Interfaith Alliance is committed to “protecting faith and freedom” and has co-created some fantastic resources bringing together “people of faith and goodwill creating marriage equality in Iowa.” Their message “Marriage Equality is a moral issue!” Check out www.faithfulvoices.org.

I spent the afternoon traveling to Drake University where I met with the Outlaws (Drake’s LGBT law student group) and ACLU student leader Laura Maring and then was off to Iowa State University where I met with 20 students and a few reporters and professors. We went around the room and everyone had a reason to support marriage equality. Straight allies wanted their friends and family members to have equal rights and LGBT students wanted to the same rights to marry and have a family. There was no opposition at any of these events.

The evening finale was a trip to a downtown Des Moines bar where I was the guest speaker at the Drinking Liberally meeting. Drinking Liberally is an informal, inclusive progressive social group where people drink and talk progressive politics with chapters across the country. This event was hosted by Amanda Mittlestadt, Will Riordan, Kelli Griffis, and Brandon Griffis. I had the bar count off in twos, gay and straight, (forgive me LBTIs), and asked them a series of questions like whether or not they had the right to file joint federal income taxes. If they said “yes” they could take a drink and if they didn’t, well, the reality of inequality is sobering.

You’ll be pleased to know that I did not go through all 1,138 federal rights before I mixed up the questions and asked about whether or not they would be denied the “marriage discount” on their car insurance. I didn’t want half a room full of drunken people and drinking liberally is also about drinking responsibly, but they got the drift that LGBTI people are denied several rights that heterosexuals have access too. And for those of you wondering, I was the designated question-asker and continue to be a proud tea totaler.

My quick trip had come to an end. I woke up the next morning, did a 20 minute radio interview with Michael Devine in Fort Dodge. Then I boarded the plane home. It was a whirlwind trip and I left just before the next snowstorm. On the plane, I felt grateful for the contributions I was able to make and the people I had a chance to meet who are working on making marriage equality a reality in Iowa.

Back home in the California sunshine, with the flowers blooming and the butterflies and hummingbirds flitting around like daytime fireworks, it’s hard to imagine what it would be like to survive such a long winter where crop fields are still frozen and trees still bare.

“We appreciate summer even more when it comes,” I can’t remember if it was Lynn or Ed who said it, but I imagine that’s how marriage equality is for all of us. We will appreciate it even more when it comes.

Iowa, you’re next!!!

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

US Customs Says Molly and I are not a family! Again!

Posted On: 2009-03-16 00:00:00

Please take a moment to send US Customs a message telling them it is wrong to treat same-sex married couples differently that different-sex married couples by forcing same-sex couples to fill out two separate forms when only one form is required per household/family.

http://help.cbp.gov/cgi-bin/customs.cfg/php/enduser/site_fdbck.php?p_sid=nfwIUXsj&p_accessibility=&p_redirect=

Thank you!

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

What the World Needs Now is Love

Posted On: 2009-03-06 00:00:00

Yesterday I stood on the steps of the Calfornia State Supreme Court with supporters of equality and those who are against us and feel that gay people are "the anti-species," that Dan White, who killed Harvey Milk, was a "hero because he killed a queer" and who called us "perverts" and said other things that were frightening and too disgusting to repeat. It was a powerful experience.

What I learned:

Love is more powerful than fear or hate. Singing is more powerful than chanting. Peace is more powerful than anger. We were in control when we were smiling, singing, and sending love to those who fear and hate us.

I want to tell you that I felt unbelievable love for the woman who was screaming in my face yesterday. I felt overwhelming compassion for her daughter whose shame I could feel as she averted my gaze. Not a condescending love, but real love. My body lacked hatred. It lacked a desire for retribution. I only wanted to sing my truth which yesterday was "What the world needs know is love sweet love it's the only thing that there's just too little of." I sang it for 45 minutes.

I locked arms with my friend Pam, who also happens to be a lesbian, a transgender man whom I just met, a younger gay man named Chris, and several young women whose names I don't even know and we just held on to each other, held each other up, sang and smiled, and stood strong in our beauty and truth. It was a spiritual experience.

I don't know what the courts will do. They may rule on the side of justice or they may kick it back to us for a rematch at the ballot box. What I do know, is that this is a movement about love and justice and that to "win," really "win," we must be and stay peaceful. We must be and stay in a place of love. We must be and stay strongly rooted in our truth and beauty and we will be unstoppable.

I want to thank everyone for their thoughts and prayers. I want to thank everyone who has contributed of their heart, mind, and other resources. Thank you for your blessings! I feel so grateful for your support.

With love,

Davina

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

Marriage Equality Advocates Take On Ant-Marriage Prop 8

Posted On: 2009-03-02 00:00:00

Marriage Equality Advocates Take On Anti-Marriage Prop 8 by Davina Kotulski, Ph.D. Go to

http://nsrc.sfsu.edu/article/marriage_equality_advocates_take_anti_marriage_prop_8

Published under:gay marriage marriage equality Proposition 8 same-sex marriage Sex and Policy Sexual Identities/LGBTQII Read

Popular Prejudice or Fundamental Freedom

On March 4, marriage equality supporters—opponents of Proposition 8—will “march forth” in a candlelight vigil from San Francisco’s Castro District to the steps of the California State Supreme Court for what they are dubbing the “Eve of Justice.” On Thursday the California State Supreme Court will hear arguments for and against the repeal of Proposition 8.

Marriage Barriers

On May 15, 2008, the California State Supreme Court ruled, in a 4:3 decision, that it was unconstitutional to deny same-sex couples the right to marry. They further stated that “strict scrutiny” applied because “the differential treatment at issue impinges upon a same-sex couple’s fundamental interest in having their family relationship accorded the same respect and dignity enjoyed by an opposite-sex couple.” (S147999 California State Supreme Court, Marriage Cases, IN RE). One month later same-sex couples began marrying.

But the tides turned on November 4, 2008. Fifty-two percent of California voters voted to change the constitution to limit marriage by defining it as a union between a man and a woman. Within days, same-sex couples were again denied licenses at the marriage license counter.

Opponents of Proposition 8 immediately filed lawsuits charging that Proposition 8 was a revision, not a simple amendment of the California Constitution, and that it violated the separation of powers doctrine and must be repealed. The lawsuits also sought to clarify the legal status of the eighteen thousand couples who were legally married between June 16 and November 4. (Strauss et al v. Horton, Tyler et al v. State of California et al, and City and County of San Francisco et al v. Horton et al.)

Proposition 8: A constitutional revision or a constitutional amendment?

A revision is defined as a “substantial alteration of the entire constitution, rather than a less extensive change in one or more of its provisions” (Amador Valley Joint Union High School District v. State Board of Equalization, 22 Cal.3d 208). In order for a revision to the constitution to be upheld, it must first be approved by two-thirds of the members of the California Assembly and two-thirds of the members of the California Senate and then it can be placed on the ballot. If Proposition 8 is found to be a “substantial alteration of the entire constitution” than it will be repealed unless two-thirds of both houses of the California legislature vote to retain it and then return it to the people for a second vote.

Proposition 8: Does it violate the Separation of Powers?

Opponents argue that Proposition 8 not only stripped away the constitutional rights of a minority by majority vote, but it rendered the judicial system impotent to protect and defend the rights of a minority group.

The Right of the Voter versus the Right of the Individual

Attorney Jerry Brown also filed a brief to overturn Proposition 8 stating that a ballot initiative cannot trump California’s Declaration of Rights without a compelling justification. In an interview with the San Jose Mercury, Brown said Proposition 8 should be invalidated because it is “inconsistent with the guarantees of individual liberty safeguarded” by the California Constitution. In other words, while voters have a right to vote to amend the constitution, they don’t have the right to use the ballot box to take away other people’s “inalienable rights” as already affirmed by the California State Supreme Court and the California Constitution’s Declaration of Rights.

Amici Briefs

There were forty-four friends of the court briefs submitted to repeal Prop 8 and seventeen to uphold it. A list can be found at

http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/courts/supreme/highprofile/prop8.htm.

Ambiguously Gay Marriage

Proponents of Proposition 8, lead by Kenneth W. Starr, have filed briefs to nullify the eighteen thousand same-sex marriages. And while it may look like this case only affects the LGBT community, if the California State Supreme Court upholds Proposition 8, it sends a message to the nation that everyone’s civil rights could be up for a majority vote and that would be a chilling precedent indeed. While justice may be delayed, let it not be denied!

Dr. Davina Kotulski is the former director of Marriage Equality USA, a nationally recognized leader, speaker and writer within the marriage equality and LGBT movements and author of Why You Should Give A Damn About Gay Marriage (Advocate Books, 2004). She currently works as a private practice therapist, consultant and coach. Visit her website at www.davinakotulski.com.

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

THOUSANDS OF GAY AMERICANS FORCED TO LEAVE THE U.S.

Posted On: 2009-02-18 00:00:00

Thousands of LGBT Americans face the terrible choice of separating from the person we love or leaving our country because same-sex couples face inequities in immigration laws. The Uniting American Families Act, a bill being introduced in the House of Representatives would allow LGBT people to sponsor their spouse/partner for immigration. Your help is needed!

1. Find out who your representative is at http://www.congressmerge.com/onlinedb/index.htm

2. Call the U.S. Capitol Switchboard at (202) 224-3121 and ask to be connected to your U.S. Representative.

3. Tell them:

I am calling to ask Representative ________________ to be an original cosponsor of the Uniting American Families Act of 2009. To cosponsor, he/she must contact Rep. Jerrold Nadler who is the lead sponsor.

The U.S. government discriminates by treating same-sex couples differently than heterosexual couples and not allowing them to sponsor a same-sex spouse for immigration. Americans should not have to choose between the person they love or their country. Too many LGBT Americans have been exiled for love. This must stop!

Please ask Rep. _________________ to cosponsor the Uniting American Families Act of 2009 by reaching out to Rep. Nadler before February 12.

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

Freedom To Marry Week - 4 things YOU can do to help

Posted On: 2009-02-11 00:00:00

Ask for a Marriage License - Feb 12 thru 14 Come support couples seeking licenses and share your story about why you support marriage equality. Since 2001, Marriage Equality USA® has engaged in annual marriage counter actions to render visible the discrimination that is enforced every day. Click here for the nationwide list of action events - or check out the chapter pages for more information in your local area.

Attend the CA State Capitol Rally - Feb 16th Love and Marriage is a statewide community rally on Presidents Day Monday, February 16th from noon to 3pm where people from all over the state will join us on the steps of the Capitol to show our solidarity for the rights of 18,000 same-sex couples who were married and look forward to the day when those rights are available again, this time for everyone. Attendees are encouraged to come wearing white, leave seeing red. Celebrities, speakers, entertainment and thousands of like-minded people will attend. Co-sponsored by Equality Action Now, California Outreach, Marriage Equality USA, Equality California and many others.

http://www.equalityactionnow.org/events.php#loveAndMarriage

Join the Equality California Lobby Day (Feb 17th)

On Tuesday, February 17, register and join activists from across the state for a legislative lobby day at the California State Capitol. The lobby day will bring together diverse community organizations and leaders from across the state for a day of coordinated advocacy and activism to support Senator Lenos SR 7 and Assemblyman Ammianos HR 5 that would put the Legislature on the record opposing Prop 8 as an invalid revision of the CA Constitution.

Register at http://www.eqca.org/site/pp.asp?c=kuLRJ9MRKrH&b=4948341

Visit the Courage Campaign's Website and tell the Supreme Court to invalidate Prop 8, reject Ken Starr's case, and let loving, committed couples marry. DEADLINE: Valentine's Day

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

Top 10 Changes for LGBT Rights or What Obama and America can give LGBT Americans that will make us very happy in 2009!

Posted On: 2008-12-17 00:00:00

Gay Agenda

1. PASS ENDA

Pass a trans-inclusive Employment Non Discrimination Act protecting the rights of LGBT Americans in the workplace. No one should be fired from their job because they are lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or gender non-conforming in their appearance or choice of clothing. It’s not fair that I could get fired, or never even hired, because I wear suits sometimes.

2. REPEAL DOMA

Repeal the “Defense of Marriage Act” which actually denies marriage to LGBT Americans seeking to marry someone of the same sex and the 1,138 federal rights that heterosexual married people have access to including: health insurance benefits, social security, filing joint federal income taxes, and having their marriage recognized outside of the state they were married in. Why should the health care benefits I receive through Molly’s work be taxed as income when her brother is not taxed extra to provide his wife health care benefits? Why is it fair to deny Marvin who was with Bill for 51 years access to Bill’s social security benefits when my mother who was with my father for 15 years will still have access to my father’s social security when he dies because she never remarried? I love my parents, but Bill and Marvin were together for many more years than my parents and Bill deserves to be treated fairly!

3. REPEAL DODT

Repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. Seriously, most other civilized militaries, yes I know that might be a contradiction in terms for some of you, allow LGBT people to serve openly. And in fact, most Americans think this policy is antiquated, not to mention a waste of our hard earned money! According to Wikipedia, a Government Accountability Office Report released in February 2005 it cost the U.S. Government “$95.4 million in recruiting costs and $95.1 million for training replacements for the 9,488 troops discharged from 994 through 2003” under DODT. We could use that money right NOW people!

4. PASS UAFA

Pass the Uniting American Families Act, (HR 2221, S 1328) a bill that would amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to allow LGBT Americans the chance to sponser their partners for immigration and citizenship as heterosexual couples can through their marriage. Immigration is one of those 1,138 federal rights that same-sex couples are denied that I talk about in my book Why You Should Give A Damn About Gay Marriage. By passing the UAFA my friend Martha could move back to the U.S. from the Netherlands with her dog and her wife, Lin. Presently, she can only bring her dog back. Check out www.loveexiles.com to learn more about couples who are living in exile for love. Please note the UAFA was once the PPIA and has been around since 2000! Feinstein, Obama and Clinton are NOT sponsors. Anyone up for another letter writing campaign?

5. PASS DPBO

Pass the Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act. This one was near and dear to my heart while I was working for the federal government for the past 12 years. Under the DPBO LGBT federal employees would be able to give their unrecognized same-sex spouses/partners health insurance, life insurance, government pensions, and other employment related benefits that married heterosexual federal employees enjoy by being married and heterosexual. It’s time to eliminate this second-class status in the workplace. Pass the DPBO. To learn more, go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_Partnership_Benefits_and_Obligations_Act

6. PASS THE HATE CRIMES BILL

Pass the Matthew Shepard Act (H.R. 1592) which would provide Federal assistance to States, local jurisdictions, and Indian tribes to prosecute hate crimes. Just a few weeks ago two brothers were attacked in New York because some guys thought they were “fags,” one of the brother’s was killed. “Fag-bashers” need to spend a little more time in prison thinking about why it’s okay to them to attack gay people.

7. REPEAL ALL mini-DOMAs and Constitutional Amendments

We must repeal these unconstitutional mini-Defense of Marriage Acts and these unconstitutional constitutional amendments. A majority should never have the right to vote down a minority group’s rights. Let us stay not keep repeating mistakes like segregation and second-class treatment of American citizens, let us end this hierarchy of hate and discrimination and grant LGBT Americans the same rights as heterosexual Americans.

8. Repeal laws denying LGBT people the right to adopt and foster children.

Gay parents are just as good for children as straight parents. Research repeatedly shows that kids that come from same-sex parents are just as healthy and well-adjusted as American kids from straight parents. It’s time to repeal these mean-spirited laws that hurt children and deny same-sex couples the right to care, nurture, and protect their children and family from unnecessary state intrusion.

9. Marriage Equality for couples without regard to sexual orientation or gender.

In all 50 states and with all the rights, responsibilities, and protections on a state and federal level. Marriage, anything less is less than equal.

10. Peace and Happiness for all.

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

THERESE STEWART WROTE THIS FANTASTIC OP-ED THAT I AM POSTING BECAUSE I THINK IT IS SO POWERFUL!!

Posted On: 2008-10-13 00:00:00

Do Californians really want to give the Mormon Church the power to decide the content of our State Constitution?

Simply put, that is what is happening in the battle over Proposition 8. The primary backers of Proposition 8 are not people who live in California trying to weigh in on a matter that concerns them. The primary backer of Proposition 8 is not even a California-based church or religious organization. Rather, the driving force behind Proposition 8 – the force that will be singlehandedly responsible for its passage if it is adopted – is the top leadership of the Utah-based Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints, otherwise known as the Mormon Church.

Consider these statistics. The Mormon Church has raised two thirds or more of the $28 million Proposition 8 supporters have raised and are using it to fill the airwaves with pro-Proposition 8 commercials. The Church leadership not only extolled its members – via telecasts made from its Utah headquarters to local Mormon churches all over the West -- to donate money to support Proposition 8, it also called on its local churches to provide thousands of volunteers to staff phone banks, do shopping center outreach and get out the vote in California in favor of Proposition 8. It even enlisted Church members in Utah, Idaho and other states to do phone banking from their homes to voters in California in to support this anti-gay ballot measure. This was no grass roots effort; it came from the Church leadership in Utah, which issued a letter directing its members to “do all you can” to support Proposition 8. Some church leaders made highly charged appeals from the pulpit, telling church members their souls would be in jeopardy if they did not give.

The Mormon Church’s involvement in California politics is not altogether new, but the degree of involvement of any church in a constitutional amendment in this State is unprecedented. The Mormon Church was a major force behind Proposition 22 in 2000 – the ballot measure that the California Supreme Court held, in May of this year, violates of our State Constitution. Unhappy with our high Court’s ruling, the Church has mobilized behind the effort to amend our state Constitution to write back in the discrimination that the Court struck down. It is fair to say that the Mormon Church has pulled out the stops this time and will not be content until its view of who should be protected by our State Constitution prevails.

It’s easy to think that this instance of a powerful out-of-state Church intervening in our state Constitutional affairs matters only to the gay community and won’t affect anyone else in our State. If you are inclined to think that is the case, think again. The Mormon Church is both wealthy and powerful, and it is not the only church with those characteristics. If the Mormon Church can buy this amendment to California’s Constitution, they and other powerful churches can buy other laws and constitutional amendments that also fit their religious beliefs – beliefs that long excluded African Americans, Asian Americans and women from positions of power – beliefs that abhor birth control, stem cell research and reproductive choice.

Even those unsure about how marriage of same-sex couples may fit into their own belief system should be reluctant to say yes to Proposition 8. For doing so will send the message to the larger churches in this country that they can buy constitutional amendments whenever it suits them. Ask yourself this: do you want someone else’s church to control the laws that govern you as a citizen? If not, say no to Proposition 8.

Written by Therese Stewart San Francisco City Attorney

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

Ten Years Ago

Posted On: 2008-08-09 00:00:00

Ten years ago, Molly and I were so excited as we planned our (first) wedding ceremony. The Hawai’i Supreme Court had just ruled that same-sex couples had a right to marry and we hoped we would be able to make our marriage legal. But sadly the voters of Hawaii voted to change the constitution taking away the right of same-sex couples to marry. Our sadness motivated action and with Californians for Same-Sex Marriage (CASSM) we tried to get a ballot initiative passed in support of equal marriage rights. We were not able to collect enough signatures, but our opposition was and there was an anti-gay marriage initiative on the ballot in the California primary election in March 2000 and we lost again.

But that didn’t stop us. As CASSM dissolved we hooked up with a handful of activists and created Marriage Equality California (MECA). We worked tirelessly recruiting volunteers, starting chapters, and asking people to sign the marriage declaration pledging their support for equal marriage rights. In 2001 we started going to City Halls on Valentines Day or Freedom to Marry Day and asking for marriage licenses.

Then on February 12, 2004, we went down to ask for our marriage license and we learned that Gavin Newsom was allowing same-sex couples to wed and we were legally married by Mark Leno in San Francisco City Hall. It was an amazing day, but our legal marriage lasted only six months taken away by the California Supreme Court. It was like getting kicked in the stomach.

So we organized a bus of 44 people and headed to DC, stopping in several states along the way explaining the 1138 federal rights and hundreds of state rights denied to us because treating us as equal human beings was/and is beyond many Americans’ imaginations. It was a powerful and painful trip opening our hearts and wounds to help open the hearts and minds of our fellow Americans. In D.C. we hosted the first and only National Marriage Equality Rally on the U.S. Capitol Lawn on October 11th, 2004, National Coming Out Day. Our rally was under-attended and unpublicized by the major national LGBT organizations who feared our speaking out for equality would cost the Democrats the election disregarding the words of Martin Luther King Jr. that “There comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, popular, or political; but because it is right.”

We had more porta-potties than people and we learned what it felt like to be betrayed by our own community. We lost some of our innocence and some of our joy, but we pushed on with the help of the amazing people that joined the ranks of Love Warriors. Together we created the Get Engaged Campaign and we traveled in teams around California from the coasts, the central valley, the state lines of Oregon and Nevada, and we reached out to find our friends and allies in small communities across the state, creating new chapters. With our new regional power we were able to support Mark Leno to get the state legislature to pass the Civil Marriage and Religious Freedom Act, twice and Gov. S vetoed it twice. Equality eluded us.

We began to struggle because when you are the poster couple fighting for marriage equality it takes away time from your having a marriage, which a friend described as “deeply ironic.” In 2007, I stepped down from my volunteer role as Executive Director of Marriage Equality USA. I needed time to reconnect with my friends and family and Molly and I put more boundaries around our relationship, stepping out of the limelight to save more for ourselves.

In March 2008, the California Supreme Court was ready to hear our case-4 years later-justice is slow. A lot of people died in those 4 years, a lot of people gave up, the stress was too much and relationships broke apart. We gripped each others hands tightly as we listened to the attorneys argue the merits of marriage equality relieved that we had pulled through the storm and were able to witness this together. Then May 15th, the court finally gave us justice, but delayed it until Jun 15th. I would be out of the country, so would have to wait until my return and scheduled our legal marriage on September 1st, our twelfth anniversary of being together and close to September 5th, our tenth wedding anniversary. But, there is still one more hurdle, a constitutional amendment that seeks to take away our marriage rights. Vote No on 8 then we can really celebrate.

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

And now Marriage Equality Italia 6-20-08

Posted On: 2008-06-20 00:00:00

It was strange timing, but I just happen to be in Italy during the time that we Californians are finally able to go to the marriage license counter and get a marriage license regardless of our sexual orientation. Finally, the long-awaited marriage equality I have spent a decade of my life working for, and here I am missing all my friend’s weddings and the chance to celebrate our victory and then…

Despite being halfway around the world in the beautiful port city Venice, Italy, I have been able to attend everyone’s weddings via the internet. I’m not kidding almost everyone’s weddings.

There were my neighbors Diane and Ruth’s nuptials as they were married by Mayor Ron Dellums; the breathtaking “It’s-all-I-ever-wanted” romantic vows of Ryan and Moe, Marriage Equality USA leaders for Alameda County; Ann and Christine’s long overdue “I dos” shared with the entire Allen-Brown Family in Sacramento; John and Stuart’s “I do, I do, I do!” which may also relate to the fact that it was their third wedding, but this time attended by their proud parents; Dave and Jeff’s regal wedding in Fairfield at the Solano County Clerk’s Office; and I could go on and on, but the internet allowed me to witness all their marriages and it’s the opportunity you get when you work hard for marriage equality, your wedding is filmed by the national media. Which brings me to my second point, I was able to see Robin and Diane and Del and Phyl’s weddings televised on the Italian News, and Molly’s marrying couples in Bakersfield was in the USA today I found at the newsstand and on-line. I don’t feel like I missed a thing, except Kleenex, because I was blubbering at everyone’s weddings, and of course the chance to do the Macarena.

To add icing to the proverbial wedding cake, I received numerous pats on the back for my contributions making marriage equality a reality for same-sex couples. I really, really appreciated everyone’s kind words. Your thoughtfulness also helped me bridge the gap from my watery post here on the Adriatic and Mediterranean Seas to the Golden State.

If that weren’t enough- Molly and I were featured in a Polish Paper, Gazeta Wyborcza. Click here http://wyborcza.pl/1,75480,5318174,I_oglaszam_was_zona_i_zona.html

And BOND Magazine published two of my articles entitled Gay Marriage: A Worldview and Why You Should Give A Damn.

Click to the link http://www.bondmag.net/gayworld.htm

If you can read Polish you are in luck, if not, just click and look at the pictures. It’s nice to feel like you’re making a difference for gay rights in Eastern Europe. Maybe next time we go back we’ll actually be able to find the gay/lesbian bar?

And today I met with Franca Bimbi, The Deputy Mayor of Venice and Professor of Sociology with the LGBT and Gender Policies Dept. of the Municipality of Venice, Fabio Bozzato from the Venetian Gay Community, and Luca Trappolin also at the University of Padua to discuss marriage equality. If that’s not LA DOLCE VITA, I don’t know what is! I brought them Marriage Equality Italia T-shirts compliments of Marriage Equality USA, a copy of my book and my two favorite marriage equality documentaries: Freedom to Marry and Pursuit of Equality. I love being on the frontier as much as I love the celebration of securing our rights. And now dream Marriage Equality Italia! Everything is possible!

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

christine@trallenya.net says:

Our marriage is thanks to you and Molly, Davina! Yes, it is all of us working together - but you are our heroes, our mentors, our teachers and leaders in every way. And, most of all, our dear, dear friends. Heartfelt gratitude to you - Miz Pioneer, Trailblazing Queer Queen. Wow, now I feel like you should be wearing a Daniel Boone coonskin hat or something. Yeah, you'd look hot in THAT! Blow kisses to Italia for me... Can't wait to visti when you get home. ~Christine BTW, there are 600 fires buring in in Ca as I write this - breathe deeply in Venice - you may have to wear a gas mask when you get home at this rate!

Posted on: 2008-06-22

mandy.j.benson@gmail.com says:

Davina, you rock in EVERY country! Thank you, thank you, thank you for all of your hard work. PS. Please eat some truffles for me. I miss them so much.

Posted on: 2008-06-21

We Won!!!!! California Supreme Court Grants Equal Marriage Rights to Same-Sex Couples!

Posted On: 2008-05-17 00:00:00

Finally some R-E-S-P-E-C-T!!!!

Many thanks to the Justices who did their job yesterday and brought justice to an unjust situation. Starting June 16th, 2008 same-sex couples can legally marry in California. It has been a long road to get this far and I'm celebrating, but it is not over until we win in the "court of public opinion" as my soon-to-be-lawfully-wedded-wife, Molly says. In the next five and half months we must ensure that the majority of Californians agree with the California Supreme Court and vote to keep our new marriage rights, rather than take them away with a constitional amendment.

Your help is needed! Now, more than ever, is the time to come out of the closet in support of equal marriage rights, now is the time to donate your time and money to the cause. Get involved with organizations that are working for equality. Now is the time to really Give A A Damn About Gay Marriage!!!

I want to thank everyone that has contributed to this historic victory, especially every same-sex couples that has every gone to a marriage license counter and asked for a marriage license, the straight allies that stood by us at City Hall, the Clergy who supported us.

Thanks to the Henning Brothers and the handful of us who started Californians for Same Sex Marriage and then Marriage Equality California and who met for years in a backroom of a cafe every month in Oakland envisioning marriage equality-Sean conklin, Brian Davis, Kara Korbell-Chinula, Justin Garrett, Geoff and Peter Scowcroft, Jim DelaHunt and Duckie, Don, and Molly, and our counterparts in L.A. L.J. Carusone, Michael Thurber, and Albert. A small group of people can change the world. Thank you for your vision, leadership, and desire bring into being what so many thought impossible. I love you and respect you for letting this be part of my life's destiny and for walking this long road as love warriors together.

I also want to thank Mark Leno for his amazing leadership and selflessness. It would take days to list Mark's contribtutions and qualities. Mark Leno's courage and vision to bring forth the marriage bill are unparalleled.

Thanks also to Gavin Newsom who didn't wait for it to be popular to do the right thing. I'm still in awe. Your courage and bold leadership inspire me beyond words. Thank you, Mayor! May yesterday's decision vindicate you and hold you up as the great man that you are. A true civil right hero!!

Thank you to the Marriage Equality USA board, steering committee, the web team, ALL the chapter leaders, the community outreach leaders, all the supportive spouses to be, the members, and the former MECA leaders and members, especially: Dave and Jeff Janis-Kitzmiller, Sam Thoron, Jamilla Tharp, Jennifer and Teresa Sookne-Mizell, Christine Allen and Ann Brown, Pam Brown and Shauna, Ryan James, Moe Perez, John Lewis, Stuart Gaffney, Kinna and Ashle Crocker, Shelly Bailes and Ellen Pontac, Whitney Weddell, Chris Gamora, Vicki Kowlakowski, Jo Hoenninger, Jim Maloney, Kathy Kelly, Joy O'Donnell, Kare Carrington, Andy Wong, Martha and Lin McDevitt-Pugh, Bill and Marvin, and The MENY Board.

Thanks to the filmmakers of Freedom to Marry Carmen Goodyear and Laurie York and the filmmakers of Pursuit of Equality, Geoff Callan, Mike Shaw, and Johnny. Your beautiful films touched the hearts of so many people throughout this country and so many other countries. Thank you for these beautiful gifts to the world. May your works of love and art continue to bless you and others.

Thanks to Belinda Ryan and Wendy Daw and everyone at Out for Immigration who are still working to pass the Uniting American Families Act so that bi-national couples can stay in the U.S.

Thanks for Marta Donayre and Leslie Bullbeck for the hard work that they did for equality for all!

Thanks to Bev Senkowski and Jaqueline Frank for risking their military careers for coming out as gay servicemembers and everything else they did in support of marriage equality.

Thanks to all the marriage equality riders on the Marriage Equality Express Caravan in 2004: Dolores, Laura, Joe, Frank, Kelly, Kara, Kare, Hanush, Shelly, Ellen, Alison, Heidi, Brian, Ted, Anthony, Nadine, Meagan, Mandy, Martha, Robin, Jan, Rev. John, Rev. Helen, Roberta, Terri, Jeannie and Jennifer, Eve, Jim, Ron, Dan, Andy, Leslie, Stuart, and John. Thanks especially to Belinda, Wendy, Bev, Jacqueline, and Molly and reporters Mike Kepka, Rona Marech, Karen Ocamb, and Roland Torres, and bus driver Ron. Special Thanks to Margaret Cho, Tuck and Patti, and Green and Root who performed for free to support marriage equality and to speakers Robin Tyler, Beth Robinson, Jimmy Creech, Sylvia Rhue, Eleanor Horton, Genora Dancel, Mark Leno, and the Gattos.

Thanks to Lindsey Ramsden, Mary Kate, Rev. Mark Wilson, Rev. Matt and his family. Rabbis Berlin and Chester, and Rabbi Denise Egger. Thank you Rev. Troy Perry!!!

Thanks to the 4000+ couples that came to SF City Hall to get their marriage licenses and to all the children, parents, siblings, family members and friends of same-sex couples who stand by us and love us. Especially Marina Gatto who fought tirelessly alongside her moms Ramon and Arzu.

Thanks to Sharon Smith, Kate Kendall, and Carole Migden who were able to transform a horrible tragedy into a civil rights victory and make sure that none of us in California ever had to experience the utter disrespect that Sharon faced when Diane was killed.

Thank you Shannon Minter for confidently standing up for LGBT rights everyday and to Evan Wolfson who has been a stand for marriage equality since the beginning.

Thanks to everyone with the Equality for All Campaign, Andy Wong, and API Equality.

Thanks to my editor for Why You Should Give A Damn for Gay Marriage- Terri Fabris.

Thanks to Shefali Kumar-Tsabary who first married Molly and I and her husband Oz Tsabary who filmed our ceremony and thanks to our friends, family members and co-workers who have supported us during the past 12 years!

Thanks to everyone else whose name I haven't mentioned but who contributed to this movement. Thank you!

Please join us for the Marriage Equality USA Bridgewalk September 14th at the San Francisco Golden Gate Bridge.

Gayly forward!!!

Davina

Please sign my guestbook at http://www.davinakotulski.com/ and visit www.whygaymarriage.com

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

kristen.l.rouse@gmail.com says:

Hey.. congrats on a HUGE payoff for all of y'all's hard work. What a lovely moment in history. Best, Kristen

Posted on: 2008-05-19

Geoff Callan says:

Unbelievable! Like I mentioned to Davina... I suggest Davina and Molly should take a well deserved vacation on February 12, 2009 (freedom to Marry day) next year! :) Geoff Callan Producer/ Director www.pursuitofequality.com

Posted on: 2008-05-19

Dana Elmendorf says:

Davina: I have sent my congratulations to chapters of MEUSA but did want to take a minute to send you and Molly my personal congratulations from Pennsylvania. Tremors from the quake in California are felt here certainly in activism circles but also personally. I do understand this isn't over yet, but do know that when I woke up the next day, after the historic decision there and the rational the courts gave....the world looked different to me. You know, those small moments when one realizes things truly are different in some way. You all have gained a strong step forward for marriage equality but your work has also sent a much broader message of the rights of all people to live under equal treatment under the law. So, thankyou and congratulations......no doubt Molly is already picking out her dress!

Posted on: 2008-05-19

Creating the Right Kind of Global Warming: a Marriage Equality Sermon for the UU Church March 2, 2008 Mendocino, California

Posted On: 2008-02-23 00:00:00

On October 16, 2000, Robert and Bill, a San Francisco couple who were registered domestic partners in California, traveled to DC for vacation. Robert got sick and ended up in the Maryland Trauma Center where Bill was denied access to his hospital room because he was told that registered domestic partners were not recognized in Maryland. Bill told the hospital staff that he had the power of attorney to make medical decisions for Robert. The hospital asked for written- proof. The paperwork was where most people keep their important documents in a filing cabinet at their home in San Francisco.

Bill called Robert’s mother and asked her to come to Maryland. He sat in the waiting room while husbands and wives were not asked to produce marriage licenses or powers of attorney and were allowed to be with their spouses. By the time Robert’s mother arrived and insisted that Bill be able to come back to Robert’s room, Robert had already died, ALONE—his wishes never heard. Bill Flannigan sued the hospital and lost. The hospital staff was just following the rules.

This is still happening today because same-sex couples are denied the right to marry!

Last year, a lesbian couple and their three children had just boarded an RFamily Cruise in Florida. One of the women became sick and was taken to a Miami hospital. Her partner and children were denied access to her hospital bed, and not able to see her until after she died. While traveling to Georgia on business, Patrick Atkins suffered from an aneurysm and a stroke. Despite the fact that Patrick and his partner, Brett Conrad, had been together for 25 years, Brad was unable to make medical decisions for Patrick because they didn’t have an advanced health care directive or medical power of attorney (rights automatically granted to heterosexual spouses). And worse still, was the fact that Patrick’s mother enforced her legal right to deny Brad hospital visitation and later visitation to the nursing home that Patrick was moved to.

Dr. Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. said “All life is interrelated. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny...strangely enough I can never be what I ought to be until you are what you ought to be. You can never be what you ought to be until I am what I ought to be. This is the way the world is made. I didn’t make it that way, but this is the way, the interrelated structure of reality.”

Dr. King understood that treating one group of people less than another, was harmful not only to the oppressed group, but to the group who mistakenly held the belief that they were superior because they were granted a greater standing in society. Dr. King pointed out, as Eckhart Tolle might point out today, or Buddha might have pointed out many years back, that the ego’s belief in superiority is our greatest downfall.

You may be asking yourself what does this have to do with marriage equality? Or, perhaps you already see the interrelatedness and so the direct harm to you, by belonging to the group that is perceived as morally and socially superior-or conversely if you belong to a group that is perceived as morally and socially inferior you know the pain it causes you. And you may already hear the call to step up and correct that error for your sake and the sake of your community, not just the gay community, but the human community, that is suffering from this collective delusion of superiority and inferiority.

This is a tall order, such a tall order in fact, that we are still working on understanding the effects of this web, this network of mutuality and shared destiny on one another, on our towns and cities, our forests, and even our drinking water, and we are still working to correct this delusion with regard to race and gender in 2008.

The UU community understands these connections and has played an integral role in awakening others to these connections not only by standing on the side of love, but because all Unitarian Universalist congregations are founded on principles which affirm and promote:

—The inherent worth and dignity of every person;

—Justice, equity and compassion in human relations;

—The goal of world community with peace, liberty, and justice for all;

—Respect for the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part.

So, today we turn our attention to ending the segregation of marriage and integrating the marriage license counters. For we understand today that allowing this inequality to exist hurts all of us and that ending marriage discrimination will have positive benefits that will ripple out passed the individual couples, whose lives will become legally as well as spiritually joined. It will create a new understanding of our shared humanity and tear down false barriers. The way Gavin Newsom did on February 12, 2004 when he wielded a mighty hammer, in the name of love and justice for all, at the wall that separated gay people from their straight brothers and sisters—that separated us from our shared humanity.

While it is a tall order, it is easy to stand on the side of love. It is easy to simply close your eyes and begin visualizing a world where same-sex couples are received with the same joy at the marriage license counter as different-sex couples. It’s easy to celebrate and honor same-sex relationships as you would different-sex relationships. It is easy to begin using marriage equality inclusive language such as the term spouse when referring to someone’s same-sex partner, rather than immediately using the word partner. Think of the power difference. It’s much easier for a straight person to tell someone it’s okay to call my spouse my partner, then it is for a gay person to ask please call my partner- my spouse.

There are 1,138 federal rights, responsibilities, and legal protections that lesbian and gay people need, but are presently denied, and help educate others. If you look at these two jars of candy hearts you can see that one is full and one is empty. Each heart represents one right that gay couples are denied—health care, social security, the right to file joint taxes, the right to citizenship for a non-US born same-sex partner granted heterosexual partners through marriage. Look into my hearts and you can see the inequality made visible.

Educate yourself about these 1,138 federal rights denied same-sex couples everywhere in the US. Educate yourself about the hundreds of state rights, basic rights that same-sex couples are denied in most states-the right to visit a same-sex partner in the hospital, make medical decisions, burial decisions.

Put a bumper sticker on your car or in your office or wear a T-shirt in support of marriage equality. Talk openly about your support of equal marriage rights and come out against initiatives and amendments that seek to take away or limit rights or create separate, and inherently unequal, substitutes. These things are easy, they cost you very little, but they contribute to a growing consciousness, a growing environment of love and support for Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender people.

These simple things can change the climate, creating the right kind of global warming—one of love and affinity: a community where the love of two women, or the love of two men, is cherished and valued; a world where gay kids can go to the prom with their boyfriend or girlfriend, share in the excitement of courtship and the beautiful ritual of marriage; a world where we can all rejoice because we have become integrated—gay and straight together.

Dr. Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. said “All life is interrelated. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny...strangely enough I can never be what I ought to be until you are what you ought to be. You can never be what you ought to be until I am what I ought to be. This is the way the world is made. I didn’t make it that way, but this is the way, the interrelated structure of reality.”

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

The Future of Gay Marriage-Divorce: Supporting Gay Marriage By Avoiding Gay Divorce

Posted On: 2007-10-17 00:00:00

It sounds cynical, but it’s true. In the U.S. fifty percent of heterosexual marriages end in divorce. Why should gay people be any different? Sure, we have struggled against all odds to love out loud, but that’s the us-against-the-world stance. While we have mastered standing up to hostile forces, we have not yet mastered the hostile forces that erupt in a marriage between two people who have to not only negotiate homophobia and unequal status, but who is going to take out the trash, how to manage the finances, what to do for the holidays, how much time to spend together and apart, and these days whether or not to have children or how to raise those kids that we’ve worked so hard to bring into our lives.

Longitudinal studies of what keeps gay couples together are still in their infancy, as is our experiences of being “married” whether through actual legal recognition (real marriage, civil unions/partnerships, domestic partnerships) or rituals of our own creation. LGBT people are just beginning to access the same experiences that our heterosexual brethren have struggled with for ages. Our community is going through a cultural growing up and while we have much to teach our heterosexual counterparts about egalitarianism and the importance of being emotionally balanced individuals who have access to their masculine and feminine sides, they have something to teach us. We can learn from those with failed marriages what mistakes not to make. From those who have worked hard to celebrate three, four, five, and six decades of marriage-how to keep the home-fires burning strong.

Of particular interest is the work of researcher, John Gottman, who did longitudinal studies of couples and discerned two categories of couples-marriage masters and marriage disasters. Gottman, who can identify, within five minutes with 95% accuracy, whether a couple will stay together or divorce, chose to share his observations about what makes marriages succeed or fail in several books and seminars that are offered to couples throughout the U.S. and Canada While I found the Gottman books personally useful, and his workshops LGBT inclusive, there are many other resources couples can avail themselves of.

We have worked hard to receive legal recognition and simple respect for our ourselves and our relationships, to legitimize our once invisible family ties, we now need to roll up sleeves and show ourselves and our partners that same respect and commitment by investing in our marriages. We need to take time to learn new skills for connection and communication, find ways to work out conflicts and minimize the negative effects of inevitable differences in opinions and values. Even though we are the same-sex, we are not the same people, and we need to learn to cherish and respect our differences and find ways to let those differences help us grow together, rather than apart. After all, while there are gay marriages, there is no such thing as a gay divorce.

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

Why You Should Give A Damn About YOUR Marriage Gay or otherwise!

Posted On: 2007-09-06 00:00:00

A funny thing happened to the new Marriage Equality USA brochures on the way to the printer. Somehow, a letter E was omitted from the final printing creating a new mission for Marriage Equality USA that of "Marriage Quality." Some might have thought it a huge costly blooper, but I was totally amused and if I dare say- pleased. While fighting for marriage equality for almost a decade I have also sporadically taught courses on marital and couples therapy, but the main thrust of my energy has, until recently, been on securing equality, rather than quality. Lately, however, my goals have shifted.

After I stepped down from Executive Director of Marriage Equality USA I had time to focus on my own marriage and its quality, something that was long overdue. It's important when you are advocating for marriage equality (regardless of your sexual orientation)that you not forget to nurture your own marriage and to rank marriage quality as high or higher than, marriage equality. Marriage activism should not take the place of having a marriage. After all, we don't want to take for granted, neglect, or miss out on the joys of our own marriage and partnership which would make finally securing equal rights too costly in the end.

Seeking balance between equality and quality lead me to John Gottman's Why Marriages Succeed or Fail and The Seven Principles for Making Marriage Work. I'd like to share some of the tips that I found extremely useful and I hope you will too!

Five Positives to One Negative It's important that couples have five positive interactions to each negative one. So, make sure that you are as committed to making your partner feel good as you are to educating people about why we need equality. Do little things every day that let your partner know why you want to marry them when it's finally legal. As you send out e-mails about breaking marriage equality news, drop your sweetie a love line. Stay connected.

Avoid the Four Horsemen Gottman says that we must watch out for four things that can devastate our marriages:

1.Criticism -defined as an attack on your partner's character or personality, different from a complaint that involves a concern about a behavior. Criticism. "You are lazy!" Complaint "It upsets me that don't do more to help out with housework."

2. Contempt -Sarcasm, name calling, eye rolling, mockery things that show at best a lack of respect for your partner and at worst disgust.

3. Defensiveness-Getting angry at your partner for bringing up concerns. According to Gottman defensiveness helps nothing, it simply escalates problems.

4. Stonewalling -ignoring or tuning the other person out. Not listening to their concerns.

Finding Your Style Are you a validator, a volatile, or a conflict avoider? Are you and your partner matched? If you are matched, where are your blindspots as a couple? Finding out your communication styles can have a huge impact on your relationship. Invest in quality!

For more information go to http://www.gottman.com

Comment on this Blog Entry

Comments:

sgelender@comcast.net says:

Davina, this is so right-on. As activists, we can forget sometimes how important it is not only to live what we 'preach' but also to be as committed (no, more committed) to our partners than to our causes.

Posted on: 2007-09-19

healingheartart@pacific.net says:

Davina, Your work and energy inspire me. Your comments about balancing love and activism is wise and needed. I look forward to your next book.. fiction or non-fiction your words are worth my time... thinking of you and supporting you all the way!!! JODY Willits California

Posted on: 2007-09-15

ttfarm@mcn.org says:

Davina, this is such an important statement you've made here. As we journey toward justice and EQUALITY we must find a way to maintain the QUALITY of our relationship. Without love, nurturance, kindness, attentive listening and time together, it's easy for a relationship to fall apart. The "Four Horsemen" are such important points. Thank you for adding this core and key info to your site and blog! - Laurie York, Co-Director, "Freedom To Marry - The Journey To Justice"

Posted on: 2007-09-10